On 07/09/17 15:18 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
As discussed in PR 79433, the recommended way to test for new features
such as std::optional has problems. The current version of SD-6 at
https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-6-sg10-feature-test-recommendations
says to simply check __has_inc
On 7 September 2017 at 17:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Does anybody object to this change? Is getting a #error still useful,
> given the existence of __has_include and __cpp_lib macros?
I wholeheartedly agree with this change. And I should point out that
vast amounts of optional's implementation
As discussed in PR 79433, the recommended way to test for new features
such as std::optional has problems. The current version of SD-6 at
https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-6-sg10-feature-test-recommendations
says to simply check __has_include(optional). This test will be true
even when
