6 Nov
2017
6 Nov
'17
3:59 p.m.
On 11/06/17 18:32, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
I'm saying that having ~10 macros defined for g++-7 -std=c++17 is probably better than ~100 macros. And having ~10 (other) macros defined for g++-15 -std=c++22 is yet better than ~200.
You're refuting your own argument, because if g++-15 would need 200 positive macros compared to g++-7's 100, g++-7 would need 100 negative macros.
g++-7 will be out of wide use by then, so it doesn't matter.
The good thing about positive macros is that an old compiler never needs maintenance. With negative macros you have to keep adding them to it.
That is not more maintenance than adding positive macros for newer compilers.