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

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.

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 ?

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 :-(

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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.