• Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> Aug 11 2010
• Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Aug 13 2010
• Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> Aug 13 2010
• Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Aug 13 2010
• Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> Aug 13 2010
• Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Aug 14 2010
• Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> Aug 14 2010
• Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Aug 15 2010
• Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> Aug 15 2010
• Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Aug 16 2010

Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> writes:

The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2 
features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic macros ?

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2 
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic 
 macros ?


Yes.

Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> writes:

On 8/13/2010 12:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic
 macros ?


 Yes.


At what release of DMC was support for variadic macros added ?

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 12:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic
 macros ?


 Yes.


 At what release of DMC was support for variadic macros added ?


Eh, many years ago. I forgot :-(

Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> writes:

On 8/13/2010 11:08 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 12:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic
 macros ?


 Yes.


 At what release of DMC was support for variadic macros added ?


 Eh, many years ago. I forgot :-(


I am trying to add variadic macro support for Boost and there is still a 
Digital Mars compiler config file there. From what I can see the config 
file supports versions 8.00 through 8.48, although I can easily change 
it to the latest version 8.52 as the latest. But without knowing which 
version and above, as reflected by the __DMC__ predefined macro, 
variadic macro support exists in Digital Mars C++, it is impossible to 
add it to the compiler config file so that end-users of Digital Mars C++ 
can use it in their code when using Boost libraries, or that Boost 
libraries themselves can incorporate variadic macros in their code, when 
a compiler suppors it, if they feel it would make their library easier 
to use.

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 11:08 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 12:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic
 macros ?


 Yes.


 At what release of DMC was support for variadic macros added ?


 Eh, many years ago. I forgot :-(


 I am trying to add variadic macro support for Boost and there is still a 
 Digital Mars compiler config file there. From what I can see the config 
 file supports versions 8.00 through 8.48, although I can easily change 
 it to the latest version 8.52 as the latest. But without knowing which 
 version and above, as reflected by the __DMC__ predefined macro, 
 variadic macro support exists in Digital Mars C++, it is impossible to 
 add it to the compiler config file so that end-users of Digital Mars C++ 
 can use it in their code when using Boost libraries, or that Boost 
 libraries themselves can incorporate variadic macros in their code, when 
 a compiler suppors it, if they feel it would make their library easier 
 to use.


Ok, I understand where you're coming from. But I'm pretty sure I did it a long 
time ago, like maybe 10 years ago.

In any case, upgrades to the latest DMC++ version are free for customers, so 
nobody should be stuck with an older version.

I just tried it with 8.12, dated 2001. Variadics work.

Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> writes:

On 8/14/2010 8:55 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 11:08 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/13/2010 12:49 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 The documentation for DMC says that it supports C99 except for 2
 features. Does this mean that the compiler has support for variadic
 macros ?


 Yes.


 At what release of DMC was support for variadic macros added ?


 Eh, many years ago. I forgot :-(


 I am trying to add variadic macro support for Boost and there is still
 a Digital Mars compiler config file there. From what I can see the
 config file supports versions 8.00 through 8.48, although I can easily
 change it to the latest version 8.52 as the latest. But without
 knowing which version and above, as reflected by the __DMC__
 predefined macro, variadic macro support exists in Digital Mars C++,
 it is impossible to add it to the compiler config file so that
 end-users of Digital Mars C++ can use it in their code when using
 Boost libraries, or that Boost libraries themselves can incorporate
 variadic macros in their code, when a compiler suppors it, if they
 feel it would make their library easier to use.


 Ok, I understand where you're coming from. But I'm pretty sure I did it
 a long time ago, like maybe 10 years ago.

 In any case, upgrades to the latest DMC++ version are free for
 customers, so nobody should be stuck with an older version.

 I just tried it with 8.12, dated 2001. Variadics work.


Are you suggesting that the earliest version supported in the Boost 
compiler configuration file for Digital Mars C++ be 8.12 rather than 
8.00 ? Because if it is kept as it is at 8.00, and despite the fact that 
customers can upgrade for free, I would need to know if variadic macros 
work or not with versions 8.00 through 8.11, or at the least I would 
need to be able to download such versions to try it for myself.

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

Edward Diener wrote:
 Are you suggesting that the earliest version supported in the Boost 
 compiler configuration file for Digital Mars C++ be 8.12 rather than 
 8.00 ? Because if it is kept as it is at 8.00, and despite the fact that 
 customers can upgrade for free, I would need to know if variadic macros 
 work or not with versions 8.00 through 8.11, or at the least I would 
 need to be able to download such versions to try it for myself.


If it were my decision, I'd abandon support for DMC++ versions older than the 
current one, 8.52, because:

1. upgrades for DMC++ users are a free download

2. if they are upgrading Boost, why not update the compiler as well?

3. I don't support any versions other than the current one (by providing free 
upgrades to the current one)

Edward Diener <eddielee_no_spam_here tropicsoft.com> writes:

On 8/15/2010 2:19 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Edward Diener wrote:
 Are you suggesting that the earliest version supported in the Boost
 compiler configuration file for Digital Mars C++ be 8.12 rather than
 8.00 ? Because if it is kept as it is at 8.00, and despite the fact
 that customers can upgrade for free, I would need to know if variadic
 macros work or not with versions 8.00 through 8.11, or at the least I
 would need to be able to download such versions to try it for myself.


 If it were my decision, I'd abandon support for DMC++ versions older
 than the current one, 8.52, because:

 1. upgrades for DMC++ users are a free download

 2. if they are upgrading Boost, why not update the compiler as well?

 3. I don't support any versions other than the current one (by providing
 free upgrades to the current one)


Good. I will let the Boost developers know that they should abandon 
support of Digital Mars C++ for all but the latest version, at the 
suggestion of Walter Bright, who created the implementation.

Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:

Edward Diener wrote:
 On 8/15/2010 2:19 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 If it were my decision, I'd abandon support for DMC++ versions older
 than the current one, 8.52, because:

 1. upgrades for DMC++ users are a free download

 2. if they are upgrading Boost, why not update the compiler as well?

 3. I don't support any versions other than the current one (by providing
 free upgrades to the current one)


 Good. I will let the Boost developers know that they should abandon 
 support of Digital Mars C++ for all but the latest version, at the 
 suggestion of Walter Bright, who created the implementation.


Sounds good. Please send them the 3 reasons as well.

Reminds me of when back in the 80's, I was asked in a panel discussion if 
Zortech supported running the C++ compiler on a floppy disk only system. I said 
sure, it costs $200 extra and comes with a hard disk.