stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: ABI stability of aligned_union et al
Date Sun, 06 Jul 2008 17:49:38 GMT
Travis Vitek wrote:
> So, I'll ask again. Should we remove the workarounds for missing
> variadic template support to avoid any future compatibility issues? This
> would essentially remove parts of c++0x until the compiler provided the
> necessary support to do it the right way, but I don't really see that as
> a bad thing.

I suggest we assume variadic templates in all future C++ 0x code
to make progress. I don't think we need to spend time removing
the workarounds that you've already implemented. They might come
in handy if we happen to decide to provide similar workarounds
for other components. If not, they won;'t cause any compatibility
problems because the rest of our C++ 0x implementation won't
compile with a compiler that doesn't support them, and they will
be also easy to remove in the future.


View raw message