From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-27 10:51:48
John Maddock writes:
>> Didn't we decide that flags for conformance should always be in the
>> form of
>>
>> BOOST_NO_some-conforming-c++-feature
>>
>> so that unless something special is done, the assumption will be that
>> the compiler conforms?
>
> Absolutely: however BOOST_TT_HAS_CONFORMING_IS_CLASS_IMPLEMENTATION
> was one of yours I believe
That was one of mine actually; I'm pretty sure I've introduced it
before we've agreed on the above, though.
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering