Subject: Re: [boost] [config] vc10 and BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-20 04:06:58
>>>> The issue is whether the decltype keyword is too broken on VC10 to
>>>> define
>>>> BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE. I think it /may/ be, so we should define it just to
>>>> be
>>>> safe, at least for 1.43.
>>>
>>> Eric, where do we stand on this? Does the VC10 decltype problem in the
>>> beta still exist in the final release of VC10?
>>
>> The bug is not in VC10 per se, but in the specification of decltype. An
>> issue has been raised with the standardization committee and proposed
>> wording has been suggested. Hopefully, it'll make it into C++0x Final.
>>
>> What that means for Boost.Config is unclear to me. We may decide to
>> define a defect macro for this particular buggy decltype behavior, since
>> gcc's decltytpe works this way, too.
>
> That sounds like a reasonable approach. Care to propose a name? What
> is the CWG issue number?
If all compilers decltype implementations have this issue, *and* it is
currently std conforming, then maybe we shouldn't have a defect macro at
all? Or at least wait until we know whether this is likely to be fixed in
the std?
Just my 2c, John.