On 24/08/2012 01:09, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 8/24/12 1:58 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 8/23/2012 1:42 PM, Jeff Flinn wrote:
Might it not be better to provide some platform specific config file(s) that undef offending macro names. In the case of nil in fusion, I'd hate to see a loss in clarity because of some bad platform practice. I've been able to address these issues by #undef'ing in just a few places.
Bad idea, IMO. Boost shouldn't be messing with things defined in 3rd party headers, especially platform headers. #including a boost header shouldn't change the meaning of existing code, or make valid platform code invalid. The same reason went into the Boost min/max guidelines and Herculean effort to bring our codebase into compliance with them.
It's been a long standing issue that I can't seem to find a resolution for: Fusion's use of nil. What can we do about it? Nothing? Do we just let the user deal with it themselves (e.g. by #undef'ing). I am somehow being compelled to succumb to the pressure. Mac folks have been pleading for years now to rename struct nil to something else. Unfortunately, it's part of the API: http://tinyurl.com/c3k7fgw
Name it nil_, and if 'nil' is not defined, provide a typedef named nil as well.