On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:49:05 +0200, Paul A. Bristow wrote: > The proposal is for several header files each containing the same > constants, only one of which would be used for any compilation. (Users > have been warned against using more than one! Nobody has suggested a way > to guard against this mistake, but I think that it would be apparent > pretty soon, probably at compile time, and at link time if not.) The > macros constants header is the simplest and could be used to provide the > appropiate value(s) above.
The difference IMHO is, that this is not a generic approach. It's a bit like replacing templates with macros. I haven't seen any convincing arguments against the code I showed, which *is* generic IMHO, but as I don't have the background of the "long saga" you mentioned, I think I'm not the right one to say what's the best way to go. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
