Re: [boost] [Boost] [Config] Macros for the absence of a full C++11 <memory> implementation

Macros to determine the availability of C++11 functions in <memory> like std::align would be useful to me.

(I know that declaration begs the inquiry "What conforming code would you write if std::align is not present?" but that is separate e-mail...)

Would a BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_MEMORY be generally useful?

Perhaps, we currently have <memory> broken up into chunks for config-testing as a lot of non-connected things were added for C++11: BOOST_NO_CXX11_ALLOCATOR BOOST_NO_CXX11_ATOMIC_SMART_PTR BOOST_NO_CXX11_SMART_PTR But as you've noticed, those don't cover the whole thing. So I guess the question is do you really want a macro for a *fully* conforming <memory> or another test for a new subset? John.