RE: [boost] Re: Re: BOOST_STD_EXTENSION_NAMESPACE and dinkumware stdlib313
On Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:05 AM, Reece Dunn said:
I agree. The question is, should the test be BOOST_MSVC >= 1310 or BOOST_MSVC == 1310, likewise for the _CPPLIB_VER test. I say this because a future version of VC may move hash_xxx back into the std namespace for future standard library conformance (does TC1 have hash_map, etc.?).
Looking at the "Whidbey" technical preview (the next version of Visual Studio... including the next version of VC++), this has not changed (yet). Richard -- All opinions are personal and do not represent the views of my employer.
<Richard_Cox@Dell.com> wrote in message news:D0B2D6499F40C34E880C9189143EC899F0BD85@brkx2km02.brk.emea.dell.com...
On Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:05 AM, Reece Dunn said:
I agree. The question is, should the test be BOOST_MSVC >= 1310 or BOOST_MSVC == 1310, likewise for the _CPPLIB_VER test. I say this because a future version of VC may move hash_xxx back into the std namespace for future standard library conformance (does TC1 have hash_map,
etc.?).
Looking at the "Whidbey" technical preview (the next version of Visual Studio... including the next version of VC++), this has not changed (yet).
I don't see why hash_map, etc. would ever be moved back into std. At some point they will simply be dropped. By this time, BOOST_STD_EXTENSION_NAMESPACE may be essentially obsolete; library writers will be using BOOST_HAS_TR1, BOOST_HAS_CPP2013 or something similar. ;-) So I think setting BOOST_STD_EXTENSION_NAMESPACE to stdext with VC>=7.1 and Dinkumware should be okay for the forseeable future. Jonathan
participants (2)
-
Jonathan Turkanis -
Richard_Cox＠Dell.com