"Rene Rivera" <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4353D480.8040305@redshift-software.com...
John Maddock wrote:
However do we really want to define macros for more than one compiler at once? The whole reason for introducing BOOST_MSVC was because other compilers were pretending to be msvc.
I'll take your word for it :-) I didn't find a mention of that in the list searches I did. But it seems logical that is the reason we would have that macro. And it does make sense in the Intel case that we would want to treat it as just one compiler. I suspect that for compilers like Intel, which are front ends to others, we will want some other define to say what the target compiler is.
But the Intel compilers aren't front ends, they are chameleons. To be a replacement for another compiler, it has to be able to behave like the one it is replacing. That means behave like gcc on Linux, and behave like MSVC on Windows, including bugs, predefined macros, and everything. That's why it is so hard to tell them apart! The Comeau compiler is a front end, using a native compiler as its code generator. The Intel compiler is not. Bo Persson