Beman Dawes:
Since we probably want to apply a fix that works with current compilers in the field, we probably want to do something like this:
#if defined(BOOST_INTEL) && defined(BOOST_DINKUMWARE_STDLIB) # define _SECURE_SCL 0 #endif
This should be applied to test programs, not to headers files. If it were applied to header files (or added to the bjam toolset for Intel), it would affect user code. Some users might actually want the Microsoft mandated checking for their own code.
Comments?
I don't agree. In principle, the tests should be a faithful representation of reality; if a certain snippet of user code fails, so should the corresponding test. We can declare that we only support _SECURE_SCL=0, and run the tests with that defined, but we should *not* hack the tests to pass under _SECURE_SCL=1 with the full knowledge that user code will fail under the same conditions. (Our other option is to patch the libraries for EDG == 3 && _SECURE_SCL.)