On 26/08/14 07:11 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 08/26/2014 04:59 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 08/26/2014 10:56 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
bits/c++config...
Which won't help users seeing them in the headers. Maybe the issue
could be avoided by chosing names that make it clear that they are
g++/libstdc++ specific, not generic?
Sure, whatever works, the names were tentative, for the cpp idea.
Paolo.
I should have mentioned this thought.
Maybe we could do something more scary like
__GLIBCXX_CPLUSPLUS_98
__GLIBCXX_CPLUSPLUS_11
__GLIBCXX_CPLUSPLUS_14
If they're macros defined by the library they should start with
_GLIBCXX (i.e. a single underscore).
so people won't use them.
The __cplusplus_11 etc. look almost "standard" ;-)
Agreed.
