
18 Dec
2012
18 Dec
'12
6:55 p.m.
On 17/12/2012 05:08, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
Thanks. This proves that the choice is deliberate.
However, it doesn't answer whether using the double-negative is a good idea. Why not use BOOST_STDC_NAMESPACE and BOOST_CXX11_RVALUE_REFERENCES instea
NO macros are for defects HAS macros are for features