Boost logo

Boost :

From: Levente Farkas (lfarkas_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-22 10:21:14


William Kempf wrote:
> I very much agree. Up until now I've had no complaint with VC++ as
> far as conformance goes. They led the pack on Windows for several
> years, and only fell behind with VC++ 6 because of radical changes in
> the standard, legal problems with Dinkumware, and the length of time
> we've waited for an upgrade. It was frustrating, but
> understandable. If VC++ 7 isn't standards conformant, however, MS
> should lose market share here!

unfortunately they won't;-(
 
> The good thing is that Intel already has a drop in compiler for
> VisualStudio. Maybe they'll reach standards conformance with out MS
> and programmers will switch in large enough numbers to drive the
> point home to them. Better yet, the .NET initiative by MS will allow
> any language vendor to integrate with VisualStudio so the door will
> be open to even more vendors. In any event, with VC++ 7 it may be
> time for programmers to leave MS in droves to convince them that they
> must follow standards conformance!

the problem is if you have devstudio you already paid for msvc++ and a compiler
itself (like intel's one), even it's much better, not enough. the other problem
is the standard c++ library. even if you use intel's compiler you still you
ms's c++ lib (which is another nightmare).

 -- Levente
 "The only thing worse than not knowing the truth is
  ruining the bliss of ignorance."


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk