On 6/4/2016 7:20 AM, Bjorn Reese wrote:
On 06/03/2016 08:30 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
You are not being very specific about the problems you encountered, so it is really hard to respond to them.
http://www.boost.org/doc/html/move/emulation_limitations.html
I am aware that both sides of a dual library, like 'move', may be different in some respects. That doesn't invalidate using CXXD for functionality that is syntactically the same and functionally the same. I did mention a number of times in the CXXD doc that CXXD_HAS_STD_XXX, for dual library xxx, can be used by end-users of CXXD to program any differences if necessary. I am not completely averse to using macro programming to smooth over any differences between both sides of a particular dual library, if it can be done. Obviously any dual library header file can be updated to do that but I would really like to keep any such one-off changes to a minimum.