From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-18 19:49:35
At 07:44 AM 11/18/2002, Dirk Gerrits wrote:
>Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> >Even Microsoft will soon be supporting template template parameters
>> >partial specialization.
>> How long more MSVC6 is going to be actively used, do you think? Is
>> there any
>> date/milestone since when we decide ignore non-supporting compilers for
>> specified features?
>Well AFAIK it has never been required that Boost libraries support
>'backwards' compilers. ISO/IEC 14882 compliant code would be acceptable.
>However, for usability, I agree that it is in everybody's best interest
>to support as many compilers as possible, which is what most Boost
Yes, that's my view too.
The point I'm trying to make is that new designs shouldn't cripple
themselves trying to support old compilers.
If it turns out the developer can apply a workaround so older compilers are
supported, that's great. But not if it results in a sub-optimal design.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk