Edward Diener <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
one could create a series of macros, let us say for VC71, like this:
// These are always defined and included in a header file at the top of select_compiler_config.hpp
#define BOOST_COMPILER_VC _MSC_VER
It's a lot more complicated than that, unfortunately, because many other compilers define _MSC_VER to "act compatible" with VC++.
You could now say:
#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_COMPILER_VC,BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION) // code #endif
or, in a different situation:
#if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_COMPILER_VC,BOOST_TESTED_AT(BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION_HIGH)) // code #endif
or, in a different situation:
#if BOOST_COMPILER_VC71 // and any other combinations you like // code #endif
Okay, I understand what you're driving at. I'm not sure if going down this road is worth the trouble, but if it is, I'd rather see a standard system for referring to versions numerically. So, for example: Version Value ------- ----- 6.0 060000 6.0sp5 060005 7.0 070000 7.1 070100 5.3.4 050304 3.4.3 030403 2.95.3 029503 I don't particularly think BOOST_COMPILER_VC == BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION is more expressive than BOOST_MSVC_VERSION == 070100 Nor do I think BOOST_COMPILER_VC <= BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION_HIGH is an improvement over BOOST_MSVC_VERSION < 070200
If you are arguing for only using BOOST_WORKAROUND, and never using a construct like the last one
Among other things, I am.
then you are advocating always using specific version numbers.
I don't know what you mean.
In that case you may want to consider at least forms like BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION and BOOST_COMPILER_VC71_VERSION_HIGH useful for your BOOST_WORKAROUND and BOOST_TESTED_AT macros.
I understand why you want it, but am not fond of your proposed names and syntax.
Of course you would have the same macros for each compiler/version
As I'm sure you know, I do think there should be a separate macro for each compiler, explicitly #defined to 0 when that compiler is not in use. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com