From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-03 04:50:02
AlisdairM wrote:
>> Recently there was some discussion about adding config support for
>> C++0x features.
>>
>> The attached test would pass for compilers implementing Core Issue
>> 106 - reference collapsing.
>>
>> There are a couple of associated issues:
>>
>> Is this our preferred naming convention?
Personally I'm easy on this, Doug has already started some BOOST_CXX0X
macros so I guess we should continue the trend. Which reminds me, we still
need test cases for Doug's new macros!
>> Does the config generating script need updating to support it?
Either we need to update the management scripts, or call the filename
boost_has_XXXX irrespective of the actual macro name and it will do the
right thing.
If this is going to be a trend, might be better to update the scripts.
John.