stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: STDCXX-425
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2008 01:17:32 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
> I'm not sure what the issue is here exactly or if its really even an
> issue.  What's the goal here?  To get rid of the include directive?
> Incorporate the code into other headers?

IIRC, to remove the #include directive. The code in the examples
should be pure, portable C++ that compiles as is with any conforming

> From Martin's comments, the header (or more specifically the code
> contained in the header) is needed in certain configurations in certain
> environments.  The header should be conditionally compiled for these
> particular configurations and environments (and it is for the most
> part).  It does appear however that some conditional guards are missing,
> e.g.
>     // undefine macros #defined by some evil C libraries (e.g., MSVC)
>     #undef max
>     #undef min

Yeah, those can be tricky (but they reflect nono-conformance). We
should be able to deal with them in our headers though.


> Brad.

View raw message