Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QwJF9-0002ST-9V for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:36:07 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-gw0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1QwJF7-000759-01 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:36:07 +0000 Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11so1434603gwb.34 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:35:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.156.132 with SMTP id z4mr4850803icw.160.1314214161014; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.43.50.200 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:29:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [99.43.178.25] In-Reply-To: <201108241521.04686.luke@dashjr.org> References: <201108191248.36093.luke@dashjr.org> <201108241521.04686.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:29:20 -0400 Message-ID: From: Jeff Garzik To: Luke-Jr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1QwJF7-000759-01 Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [PATCH] Boost filesystem v3 support X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:36:07 -0000 On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Wednesday, August 24, 2011 3:19:08 PM Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: >> > This patch conditionally adapts the one line needed to support boost >> > filesystem version 3 (default in Boost 1.46+ and required for 1.48+) >> > >> > I have tested it with Boost 1.41.0 to verify it still works on these >> > older versions too. >> >> Your change appears to be technically correct. =A0It is disappointing >> for #ifdefs to crap up the code, though... > > It's only one line, and can be removed when the old APIs are sufficiently > removed. Yeah, I think it is fair to apply. Just saying... a nicer version would be... nice. Most projects work a bit to hide this stuff in headers, so that the actual code is a bit clean. Now, this is a general guideline, not a hard rule. We have plenty of #ifdef windows code already, for example. --=20 Jeff Garzik exMULTI, Inc. jgarzik@exmulti.com