There seems to be a lot of confusion about these macros, so let me try and give you the full lowdown:
BOOST_NO_INT64
Indicates that boost::int64_t and boost_uint64_t do not exist in boost/cstdint.hpp. It's a defect macro because these types are documented
as existing; it doesn't indicate a defect in the compiler, although if we're being picky, neither these types nor *any* of the exact width types in boost/cstdint.hpp are required to be supported by C99. If you need a 64-bit integer type then this macro is the one to check (and then use [u]int64_t).
Note these macros should only be used when overloading/specialising for all intrinsic types, such usage should probably be infequent IMO.
This is exactly my problem with polymorphic_(i/o)archive.hpp. Its an interface class that redirects save/load for all intrinsic types to the implementation in a derived class. Among the intrinsic types considered is long and int64 (long long is not considered - the name suggested a compiler dependent kludge). Currently I use BOOST_NO_INT64 but now I see that this fails on at least one machine where apparently int64 is a typedef or macro for long. In this environment I get a compile error because a rather than a function overload I get a compiler error with function redefinition. Before, I had a homemade BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_INT64_T which seemed to work. What is the best thing to do in this situation?
The macros BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_INT64_T and BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_UINT64_T appear to have been removed, so no cleanup necessary :-)
:-( It seems that this is just what I need. I didn't realize it existed as I just depended on the information in the documentation and didn't look at the config.hpp file. Robert Ramey