Re: [boost] Survey of Libraries and Visual C++

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-22 09:27:52

At 09:21 AM 1/22/2001 +0000, Steven Youngs wrote:

 >I spotted the original post from David Wolfram on a microsoft news group 
-
 >microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc.libraries if I remember correctly. I
 >replied to him in private email suggesting that he also ask his question 
on
 >the boost mailing list where I hoped he'd get a more representative 
answer
 >to his questions [maybe others also suggested boost to him as well - I
 >don't know].

Thanks, Steve.  Given the amount of time boost developers waste trying to 
get conforming code to work with VC++, we certainly have a vested interest 
in seeing MS improve their compiler.

 >Now maybe his post is slightly off topic in some peoples eyes...

I don't see the original post as being off topic so much as I see it as 
something we could waste a whole lot of discussion time on.  People on the 
C++ committee use the term "violent agreement" when discussion participants 
actually agree on some outcome, but insist on arguing about the details.  I 
always hate to see people get all worked up over things they basically 
agree about.

Anyhow, I hope boost members will respond privately or even publicly to 
David Wolfram's original post if they care about library interoperability.

--Beman