From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-05-01 15:59:53
On 2020-05-01 18:50, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
> On 5/1/2020 10:37 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
>> On 2020-03-30 19:45, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
>>>
>>> 2) Updating Boost Config to support the clang-based compilers. I have
>>> done this and the PR has been merged to 'develop' on Boost Config.
>>>
>>> 3) In the update to Boost Config, I have created these macros:
>>>
>>> a) BOOST_BORLANDC = __BORLANDC__ with __clang__ not defined
>>> b) BOOST_CODEGEARC = __CODEGEARC__ with __clang__ not defined
>>> c) BOOST_EMBTC = Embarcadero C++ compilers with __clang__ defined
>>
>> Are these macros not documented in Boost.Config?
>
> They are not documented in the Boost.Config documentation. But neither
> are any other BOOST_ compiler specific macros.
They are documented here:
See BOOST_MSVC, BOOST_GCC, BOOST_CLANG, etc.
> BOOST_BORLANDC = __BORLANDC__ && !__clang__
> BOOST_CODEGEARC = __CODEGARC__ && !__clang__
> BOOST_EMBTC = __CODEGEARC__ && __clang__
>
> I did not want to have to type the equivalent of the long form whenever
> Boost config.hpp was included in some library's code, so I created the
> macros in borland.hpp and embarcadero.hpp in Boost.Config. In cases in a
> library's code where Boost config.hpp is not being included in some TU
> (rare) I create the equivalent of the long form as my fix.
>
> The idea of my PRs to incorporate Embracadero's clang-based compilers
> into Boost was to change all the old references to __BORLANDC__ and
> __CODEGEARC__ to BOOST_BORLANDC and BOOST_CODEGEARC respectively so that
> the Embarcadero clang based compilers are not affected by them. There
> are still bugs in the Embarcadero clang based compilers, but much, much
> less than in the old bcc32.
Having the dedicated macros to detect particular compilers is fine. But
we need to document what those macros mean (i.e. which compilers they
represent).