On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 19:15 +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote: > On 06/01/2012 03:16, Rui Maciel wrote: > > On 01/05/2012 04:05 PM, Chow Loong Jin wrote: > >> The only macro I can find to do with detecting C++0x is > >> __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__ which is probably not portable. __cplusplus is > >> supposed to be defined to a value greater than 199711L, but on my system it > >> seems to be defined without a value, defaulting to 1. > > After a bit of digging, a bug report has already been filed for this > > problem. > > It was filed in 2001 and it appears to have been fixed in October 2011. > > Here is > > a link to the bug report. > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773 > > > > So, basically the __cplusplus macro will work with GCC 4.7. Previous > > releases > > will be left broken. > > Interesting, so for handling gcc something like the following should work, I > guess. > > -----8<----- > #if __cplusplus >= 201100L || defined (__GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__) > ... > #endif > ----->8----- > > But how should we handle MSVC or other compilers? > > > That said, C++98 code could also benefit from this addition since it allows > the > use of out-of-sigc++ functors. I have managed to amend the implementation to > compile with -std=c++98, but it requires BOOST_TYPEOF. Perhaps we could > isolate > the BOOST_TYPEOF implementation for inclusion into sigc++?
Instead of checking for particular compiler versions, we would generally add a test that is run during configure time. That would test for the compiler capability. There are already several tests like this in libsigc++. -- murr...@murrayc.com www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ libsigc-list mailing list libsigc-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/libsigc-list
