Boost logo

Boost :

From: Reid Sweatman (reids_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-07-14 19:37:11

> 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
> get).
> 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.
> Dietmar
> 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...).

Wow, I guess I really pushed one of your buttons <g>. Sorry, man. However,
there's *no such thing* as a totally compliant compiler, so ignoring the
outfit in Redmond for the nonce, do you really want to limit the usefulness
of your code to a tiny fraction of compilers that can handle it with no

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

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