On 11/06/17 04:15, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Now that there are standard feature-testing macros (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/p0096r5.html) that are being implemented by at least g++ and clang++, would it perhaps make sense for us to reevaluate our decision to provide negative macros in Boost.Config and start defining the standard feature macros instead on the compilers that don't support them?
I think this is a bad idea. Boost.Config macros do not necessarilly correspond to what the compiler defines. Compilers lie sometimes by defining a macro while the corresponding feature is broken. Besides, I believe this is not Boost's prerogative to define compiler and standard library-specific macros. Also, on the std-proposals list (IIRC) there was a discussion about SD-6 macros, and there were even initiatives to entirely drop the whole idea. The future of SD-6 is not quite clear, IMHO. At least, library-specific macros have very limited use and are prime candidates for changes or plain removal.