Re: boost, BOOST_HAS_VARIADIC_TMPL and std=c++0x

[Julio Merino <jmmv%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On 11/16/11 6:43 PM, David Holland wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 01:08:46PM -0500, Julio Merino wrote:
>  > At some point, David Holland wrote:
>  > >It's hard enough trying to figure out wtf is
>  > >going on in the C++ when something fails; wading through to figure out
>  > >what its configuration system did to you as well will only make it
>  > >that much worse.
>  > 
>  > That's not any different than wading through the autoconf stuff
>  > they have, which is also very "non-standard" and messy (last I
>  > looked).
> 
> But that way it's at least the same from one time to the next. Or at
> least, that's what I was thinking. Maybe I don't understand; there's
> lots to not understand about Boost too. :-/

The problem is that this particular library in Boost doesn't seem to
tolerate this "same configuration one time to the next" well.  It seems
a pretty bad idea to me for a library to change its API based on the
compiler... but I think that's what is happening here and the way it's
supposed to "work".  So, by hardcoding the configuration, we are
breaking this expected behavior.

What I'm trying to say is that it seems to me that Boost is designed
with the mentality of using Boost.Config and header-only libraries (with
a few exceptions) in general, so having different configurations on
different runs is to be considered normal.

-- 
Julio Merino / @jmmv