From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-02-25 21:13:54
On 2/25/2021 3:48 PM, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> On 26/02/2021 8:58 am, Robert Ramey wrote:
>> Right.Â Still it's only 5 tests.Â After tracking this down - which
>> took a surprising amount of time given branches, etc - I considered my
>> options and the easiest and most future looking was to just suppress
>> these tests for compilations with C++ version <C++11.Â It's a good
>> simple, expedient solution.Â I just needed an attribute to condition
>> on. Â Â As chris pointed out I can condition one boost version.Â This is
>> a practical and simple idea and I'll use it if nothing better comes up.
> Conditioning a boost test on boost version < N is equivalent to just
> unconditionally suppressing it, no?
> Isn't the goal to only suppress it when not compiling >= C++11?
> Shouldn't you just check __cplusplus >= 201103 for that?
Unfortunately __cplusplus is not totally reliable in a number of
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk