RE: [boost] Submission policy

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-05-09 14:47:08

At 10:46 PM 5/7/00 +0100, Paul Moore wrote:

>In my view, for Boost to be credible, it needs to be of practical
use. Like
>it or not, this means having working implementations on the
"standard"
>compilers. For Unix, I assume this means GCC. For Microsoft, GCC is
a start
>(with mingw and cygwin available), but I'd like to see Borland and
MSVC at
>least partially supported. I don't know for Mac or other platforms.
>
>How about a statement to the effect of
>
>* Is portable and not restricted to a particular compiler or
operating
>system. Implementations should ideally run on currently available
compilers
>(gcc, MSVC and Borland C++ are widely used). Providing limited
functionality
>where compiler features are missing is acceptable.
>
>[[I just spent 15 minutes staring at this posting, trying to word a
rant
>along the lines of "I hate MSVC, but I am forced to use it, I want
to use
>good C++ libraries and I'm sick of finding the good libraries all
have
>disclaimers along the lines of "we don't support MSVC because it's
too
>broken"". Thankfully, I decided not to include it. :-) :-(]]

In the update just posted, I avoided naming any specific compiler or
vendor.  Most of the compilers seem to be trying to improve
compliance.  We will have to wait until July for the beta of MSVC++ 7
to see if that statement applies to Microsoft.

--Beman