"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes:
John Maddock wrote:
Would you like to make and manage the change? Remove the workarounds from win32.hpp, and then patch all occurrences of min and max throughout boost? John.
<recap> We agreed to make boost work in the presence of the min/max macros by wrapping all min/max function identifiers in parens, like (std::min)(a,b); </recap>
I have spent some time and made the 800 or so edits throughout boost required to make it play nice with the min/max macros. I'm running regressions now. I have a couple of questions about procedure before I can commit the changes.
1) Is this a good time?
Yep.
I know there's talk about a 1.31.1 release. Will this be done from the 1.31.0 branch or from main?
From the branch.
I don't want to destabilize before a release.
Good thinking.
2) I can't test with old compilers, which are the ones most likely to have a hard time with this change.
They all compile and run the following: namespace std { template<class T> const T& min(const T& a, const T& b) { return a<b?a:b; } } int main() { int x = 0; int y = 1; return (std::min)(x,y); } But where will the definition of min come from on broken stdlib implementations?
Also, I'm not a CVS guru. If all hell breaks loose as a result of this change, is there someone willing to help me back it out?
Just "cvs tag" to mark the state before you start making changes and it'll be comparitively easy.
3) Is there a boost developer style guide where we can document the fact that all calls to min/max functions must be wrapped in parens?
4) This is the sort of thing developers will forget to do even if it's in a style guide. A simple way of ensuring this stays fixed would be to run the regressions with min() and max() #defined to garbage, so that violations are detected and corrected early. Is this possible?
Yes, it's possible, but that'll only detect the usage: min(x,y) and not std::min(x,y) both of which are going to be banned, right? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com