Subject: Re: [SG10] Draft: ready for the mid-term mailing?
From: Nelson, Clark (clark.nelson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-06-26 16:22:52
> On 06/26/2013 09:13 PM, Nelson, Clark wrote:
> > Please note that I am unable to provide a rational explanation
> for SG10's
> > decision not to recommend macros specific to the new headers.
> I don't follow. I can see two yellow spots in the attached file.
> Assuming N3662 is dynarray (sorry, I'm in a hurry), this is
> covered by __has_include(<dynarray>), right?
> Same for <optional>.
Sure; but that won't give the right answer for a library that provides
a new header, used with a compiler that doesn't support __has_include.
(Just to make sure there's no confusion: __has_include isn't specific to
either of the new headers. When I refer to macros specific to the new
headers, I'm talking about __cpp_lib_header_*.)
SG10 list run by firstname.lastname@example.org