Boost logo

Boost :

From: Dietmar Kuehl (dietmar.kuehl_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-07-14 12:09:41

At 10:51 13.07.99 -0700, Reid Sweatman wrote:
>As someone who's force to use one of the most broken compilers on the
>market, I feel I have to protest. While the way the SGI STL did it is
>hardly ideal, at least it did give me a very easy piece of documentation for
>seeing exactly *which* pieces of the STL my compiler would support, and
>which it would work around. I've no objection to doing this sort of thing
>another way, but do it it must! It's fine to sit in an Ivory Tower (maybe
>not so politically correct as it once was <g>), but when you have to work
>with one of those broken compilers, and furthermore, the one with the
>biggest market share, you have to be able to *work*.

Let me put it this way: I compile all my code with a real existing,
publically available compiler (egcs-1.1.2), use only standard code
(somewhat ascertained by '-pedantic -ansi -W -Wall') and no compile
time switching as long as I'm working on stuff which is supposed to
work with a standard conforming compiler (eg. the 'dir_it' obviously
needed some compile time switching because it left the realm of standard
C++ and entered other realms like eg. POSIX). I once tried to compile
eg. the priority queues with a compiler from some lame Richmond located
compiler vendor. To pretend that I had few success would be an
overestimate: It would kind of imply that I had at least some success...
Apart from the technical problems I have the additional organizational
problem that my system does not run any proprietary operating system
required to run certain also proprietary, non-free compilers. Thus, it
would require a substantial investment to put me into a position where
I could even attempt to port the free code to some inferior platform.

Sorry, but just the fact that some compiler has the biggest market
share is no argument for me to spent my spare time to increase the
usefulness of this compiler. OTOH, I'm working as consultant and can
definitely be hired to port my code to some strange platform (and for
support if this is desired and/or necessary despite the excellent
documentation :-) Pay me and I will hack what you want me to
hack (of course, the costs depend on what you want me to hack, however,
porting my or any Boost code for a free release would be in or below
the range for "normal" [German] consulting rates, ie. what I currently

Baseline: I like to hack and do so for free but only if it is fun.
Supporting non-standard compilers is no fun (at least not to me) and
would also cost me money.


PS: The offer of consulting does *NOT* imply that I'm unemployed! However,
    porting my own code to some system would be a better job than hacking
    the stuff I'm currently hacking (using the above mentioned lame
    compiler anyway...).

------------------------------------------------------------------------ home: - Simplifying group communications

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at