> My understanding falls short in trying to understand the > difference in > (possible) recommendation of __has_cpp_attribute and the non- > recommendation > of __has_feature, where recommending it would seem to be > consistent. If it's > too much, just let me know and I'll stop trying to understand.
OK, I didn't realize until now that your concern was about the apparent inconsistency between not recommending __has_feature and recommending __has_[cpp_]attribute. Would it be fair to restate your questions as, why are we recommending something like __has_attribute when we didn't recommend __has_feature? (Actually, whether that's the exact sense of your question or not, I think that's a very, very important question.) Clark _______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
