Re: Rationale for a #define

From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-08 00:33:06

on 10/6/00 9:34 PM, Mark Rodgers at mark.rodgers_at_[hidden] wrote:

>> Can anyone confirm that the problem is gone in BCC 5.5.1?
> 
> It seems to be.
> 
>> If so, then is BCC 5.5.1 a free, easily-available upgrade from BCC 5.5?
> 
> It is.
> 
>> If that's the case, then we could drop BCC 5.5 support
> 
> I agree.  I think you should just remove it.  I notice Beman is using 5.5.1 in
> his regression tests.

I'll remove it for my next update.

[SNIP]
> We can't really support every combination of versions, and if "upgrade" is an
> applicable answer to a problem, then I think it is appropriate.

Is this only for "free" minor upgrades?  Major upgrades are usually not
free, so an user may not be able to take advantage of those "upgrade"
solutions.

--