"John Maddock" <john@[...].uk>  writes:

> > Is there a good reason that the config library needs to use a
> > "creative" choice of file extensions rather than the boost standard
> > of ".*pp"?
> 
| Well they're not really complete .cpp files, and they're not headers as such
| either - more like snippets of code that get #included by various other
| files (the .cpp ones, and the configure script), so I wanted something
| distinctive to separate them from regular source and header files.

Then perhaps using some extension that is not a common C++ extension
would be better?

I know that gcc uses .tcc for something similar to this.
(mostly for explict template instantiations)

As for "standard" extensions, g++ recognizes these as C++ source: cc,
cp, cxx, cpp, c++ and C

-- 
	Lgb

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost