On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:07 AM, Thorsten Ottosen <nesotto@cs.aau.dk> wrote:
Hansi skrev:
Hello,
the problem with _SECURE_SCL define was already discussed a few times on this list. But til now it came never to a end. Is there any interrest to get also compiled libraries for _SECURE_SCL enabled and _SECURE_SCL disabled?
Yes. I define
import feature ;
# # Composite feaure that ensures <define> can propagate # to all dependencies, not just sub-projects. #
feature.feature secure-stl : on off : propagated composite optional ; feature.compose <secure-stl>off : <define>_SECURE_SCL=0 <define>_CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE=1 <define>_SCL_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE=1 <define>_CRT_NONSTDC_NO_DEPRECATE=1 ;
And then add
<secure-stl>off
to the requirements.
I am in favor of libraries being named differently, eg. with "_nsc" suffix.
Oh please yes. I always compile boost with secure_scl and a few others things disabled (or some of my programs take exponentially longer to run). Having name-mangled libraries for having those enabled or disabled would be perfect.