Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
In this answer to a question asking “is doing Z this way portable” the idea is “boost does it this way, it means it is very portable”.
Can I just always consult boost sources to find the most portable way of doing something in C++? How can I judge for myself if boost is really such a collection of super-portable code?
There are some cases where Boost libraries exist precisely because they wrap very non-portable code. The most obvious examples are the file system and threading stuff.
The telltale sign of this is a large use of Boost.Config macros. Boost code that doesn’t depend on Boost.Config (or other non-standard #ifdefs) will be highly portable.