From: John Maddock (jm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-07 06:04:21
> So John, would you be interested in trying to get this sorted out for
> the next release? As I have said, I currenly only use BCB, and so can't
> offer much help for other compilers.
Yep.
> Would it be best to have something like a boost/config/preinclude.hpp
> file which includes a compiler specific pre-include and then a
> boost/config/postinclude.hpp for afters?
I'm wondering how complicated to make this - one option would be to do
something a little like the config system does and have:
#ifdef BOOST_ABI_INCLUDE
#include BOOST_ABI_PREFIX
#endif
// code...
#ifdef BOOST_ABI_INCLUDE
#include BOOST_ABI_SUFFIX
#endif
which would let users define their own prefix/suffix headers if they want
to.
> I've created ones for BCB which I use here, that simply do
>
> #praga nopushoptwarn
> #pragma option push -a8 -b -Vx -Ve -pc -w-8027
>
> for pre and
>
> #pragma nopushoptwarn
> #pragma option pop
>
> for post (probably don't need the nopushoptwarn in postinclude though).
Yep.
> These options are from regex. I may be a better idea not to include
> disabling warnings in the default boost options?
Some of those warnings can get pretty pesky at times
> And also, It might be
> worth adding -Vg- to disable codeguard for boost, unless the new build
> system will build CodeGuard libraries as well as non-cg enabled libraries.
Does adding codeguard info break the ABI? I didn't think it did so (there
are no codeguard protected std libraries for example), and I mix and match
codeguard and non-codeguard code all the time without any apparent issues...
Here's what the STLPort that Borland ship is using:
# pragma option
push -Vx- -Ve- -a8 -b -pc -w-inl -w-aus -w-sig -w-8062 -w-8041 -w-8008 -w-80
12 -w-8027 -w-8057 -w-8091 -w-8092 -w-8066
> These options also should be the same as the default jam options for the
> compiler also.
Yes, that should be the case now I think.
I'm slightly tied up this week, but I'll try and add something to regex and
see how it looks.
John.