incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r541672 - /incubator/stdcxx/trunk/include/rw/_config-msvc.h
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:44:51 GMT
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com] 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 8:39 PM
>> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r541672 - 
>> /incubator/stdcxx/trunk/include/rw/_config-msvc.h
>>
>> Well, I guess we need to decide if it's a good idea to 
>> maintain two sets of the same chunks of code or if it would 
>> be better to factor the code into a common file. If the 
>> latter, we need to decide on the mechanism we want to use to 
>> use the code with each compiler. Here are the possibilities I see:
>>
>> 1. Status quo: For an Intel C++ installation on top of MSVC 
>> _config.h #includes both _config-msvc.h and _config-icc.h, 
>> and _config-msvc.h must be prepared to deal with it.
>>
>> 2. Duplicate CRT-specific macro hackery from _config-msvc.h 
>> in _config-icc.h for Intel C++ on top of MSVC.
>>
>> 3. Move CRT-specific macros hackery from _config-msvc.h to a 
>> new config header, say _config-msvcrt.h, and #include this 
>> header from both _config-msvc.h and _config-icc.h, making 
>> sure _config-msvc.h is #included only for MSVC and not for 
>> Intel C++ on top of it.
>>
>> Preferences? Any other possible ways to deal with this?
> 
>   3 is optimal way, as for me.

Sounds good to me too. I created a new issue/improvement to
track this change, assigned it you, and scheduled it for 4.2:
   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-429

Martin

Mime
View raw message