Subject: Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #2345: [mpl] Patch to improve support for CodeGear C++Builder 2009
From: Boost C++ Libraries (noreply_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-08 21:27:50
#2345: [mpl] Patch to improve support for CodeGear C++Builder 2009
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nmusatti | Owner: agurtovoy
Type: Patches | Status: assigned
Milestone: To Be Determined | Component: mpl
Version: Boost Development Trunk | Severity: Problem
Resolution: | Keywords:
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment(by nmusatti):
Replying to [comment:3 agurtovoy]:
First of all. keep in mind that I'm not the original author of most of the
patches I submitted in the last few weeks. These are the work of Alisdair
Meredith and his collegues at CodeGear. I'm more or less just helping with
getting them in shape for being applied to trunk.
> Overall, it looks good. A couple of questions:
>
> 1. In "assert.hpp", why
>
> {{{
> -#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, >= 0x560) &&
BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, < 0x600) \
> +#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, BOOST_TESTED_AT(0x610)) \
> }}}
>
> vs.
>
> {{{
> -#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, >= 0x560) &&
BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, < 0x600) \
> +#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, >= 0x560) &&
BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, BOOST_TESTED_AT(0x610)) \
> }}}
> ?
I guess this is just meant as a simplification, as the last compiler
before 5.6.0, i.e. 5.5.1 is about eight years old and not likely to be
able to compile very much of current Boost anyway.
> 2. In "quote.hpp", why
>
> {{{
> -#if defined(BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARAMETERS)
> +#if defined(BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARAMETERS) &&
!BOOST_WORKAROUND( __BORLANDC__, >=0x590 )
> # define BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_QUOTE_TEMPLATE
> #endif
> }}}
>
> vs. modifying BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARAMETERS condition in
"aux_/config/ttp.hpp"?
I have no idea, sorry...
> 3. Changes to "apply_wrap.hpp" and "quote.hpp" won't have any effect
until we regenerate preprocessed headers. Were you testing the whole thing
with BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_PREPROCESSED_HEADERS defined?
Yes. My problem is I don't know how to regenerate the preprocessed headers
for this compiler; still either that needs to be done or needs to be
defined BOOST_MPL_CFG_NO_PREPROCESSED_HEADERS, if just on a temporary
basis.
Cheers,
Nicola
-- Ticket URL: <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2345#comment:4> Boost C++ Libraries <http://www.boost.org/> Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-02-16 18:49:58 UTC