On Sunday 29 September 2013 21:19:24 Daniel James wrote:
On 29 September 2013 21:12, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday 29 September 2013 20:57:56 Daniel James wrote:
On 29 September 2013 19:52, Beman Dawes <bdawes@acm.org> wrote:
Please do not do that. I had face-to-face meetings this week with Chandler Carruth and others working on Clang for Windows. They are depending on Boost's tests to find bugs in Clang's emulation of Visual C++, and if you work around their bugs it will deprive them of a valuable testing tool.
They should be testing with BOOST_COMPILER_CONFIG set to "boost/config/compiler/visualc.hpp". That way BOOST_MSVC and the appropriate compatibility macros will be set for them, but we can still use BOOST_MSVC to treat Visual C++ differently to clang.
BOOST_MSVC should only be defined for genuine MSVC, not for any pretenders. That's the whole point of this macro.
Errr, that's what I said. I was suggesting that they could test with BOOST_COMPILER_CONFIG set to the Visual C++ header so it will be set in *their* tests. For our use BOOST_MSVC wouldn't be set.
I don't understand. Why would they test a known to be incorrect configuration?