"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I agree completely, and I'll even promise not to change my mind for at least > a week :-)
Good! You, Aleksey and I all agree. So shall we go with this definition of BOOST_WORKAROUND from Gennaro Prota? #define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) ((symbol != 0) && (symbol test)) And, I suggest BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, |0x569) As the standard "comment" about the last known version where the workaround is needed. -- David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost