Rozental, Gennadiy wrote:
There's boost/compatibility/cpp_c_headers/cwctype and boost/compatibility/cpp_c_headers/cctype. Can we use those instead and be assured of portability? Everyone seems to be reinventing workarounds for these nasty little beasts.
I was under impression that we should only use these headers where there are no native headers with appropriate name. Isn't it true?
Not sure. It says in the documentation: <http://www.boost.org/libs/compatibility/index.html> <quote> Boost.Compatibilty library This library provides workarounds which allow the other Boost libraries to be used on otherwise non-conforming platforms. We hope that it will be possible to remove this library at some time in the future as standard library suppliers become more conforming. </quote> I think it is the right place for a common workaround to such problems. We too had the same problem as you had and had to write some similar compatibility workarounds. Other libraries also provide some sort of workaround (e.g. <http://www.boost.org/boost/regex/config/cwchar.hpp>). I think it would be best to have a single place to put them. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net