Boost logo

Boost :

From: Dejan Jelovic (djelovic_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-22 06:31:54

David Wolfram wrote:

> 2. If you cannot use Visual C++ with these libraries, what are the
> causes of this? For example, does the library require partial
> template specialization support? Do other issues also prevent you
> from using the library with Visual C++?

Almost all libraries work with Visual C++. This compiler is used by
something like 50% of the world's C++ programmers, so all vendors try to
support it as much as they can.

Getting a template-heavy library to work in Visual C++, however, usually
involves cutting out parts of its functionality and making all or most
members public.

> 3. If you are a library developer, what workarounds or design
> constraints were required for compatibility with Visual C++? What
> were the most significant ones?

VC++ 6/SP4 can't compile member templates and template friends. It either
produces an INTERNAL COMPILER ERROR or silently produces bad code.

> Did the workarounds or constraints have performance impacts?

No. The results of workarounds are:

1. Significantly reduced functionality.
2. Public data members.

> I hope to hear from you, and shall summarize the replies if they are
> numerous.

Let me use this opportunity to make a suggestion to the VC++ team:

Why don't you replace Dinkumware's STL with STLport? I'm sure Boris would be
willing to license STL to you guys on very favorable terms, and this would
take care of whole lot of headaches.

Two reasons why this would be a good move:
1. Dinkumware still has a number of bugs.
2. STLport has a debug mode in which it checks if one is using invalidated
iterators, incompatible iterators, etc. This is extremely useful.

Dejan (

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