Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:
But I think it makes much more sense if BOOST_WORKAROUND itself includes the patch, so that instead of its current definition
# define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) \ ((symbol != 0) && (1 % (( (symbol test) ) + 1)))
it looks like
# define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) \ (defined(symbol) && (symbol != 0) && (1 % (( (symbol test) ) + 1)))
Anyone sees some problem with this?
That would be much nicer. However, reverting my patch and applying yours (below, to confirm I got it right :)), I get this when compiling my test case: $ g++ -Wundef -Iboost/cvs -o trial trial.cpp In file included from boost/cvs/boost/random.hpp:36, from trial.cpp:1: boost/cvs/boost/random/linear_congruential.hpp:139:64: operator "defined" requires an identifier boost/cvs/boost/random/linear_congruential.hpp:139:64: missing '(' in expression Index: boost/detail/workaround.hpp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/boost/detail/workaround.hpp,v retrieving revision 1.11 diff -u -p -r1.11 workaround.hpp --- boost/detail/workaround.hpp 25 Aug 2005 16:27:20 -0000 1.11 +++ boost/detail/workaround.hpp 14 Oct 2005 09:07:35 -0000 @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ # ifndef BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) \ - ((symbol != 0) && (1 % (( (symbol test) ) + 1))) + (defined(symbol) && (symbol != 0) && (1 % (( (symbol test) ) + 1))) // ^ ^ ^ ^ // The extra level of parenthesis nesting above, along with the // BOOST_OPEN_PAREN indirection below, is required to satisfy the [angus@boris cvs]$