From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-13 02:35:36
Edward Diener wrote:
> It is really difficult to know where the changes need to be done. There are
> a number of tests in the Boost header files and source files for Borland
> version numbers 0x560, 0x561, and 0x562 but none of these are extended to
> cover 0x564. I would think that the library developers where these tests are
> being made would attempt to see whether or not these tests also need to be
> applied to 0x564 or not. But I don't think most Boost library developers
> even care about this anymore, unfortunately. I hope I am wrong about this.
I think part of the problem comes from Borland not releasing the
comamnd-line compiler 5.6 for free, as they did with 5.5.
Also, Update 4 was only released a week or 2 before 1.30.0 was released,
so there was minimum amount of time to make changes for this. We pushed
for a change in format to take into account 0x564 which did get in for
the release but many didn't because people were un-willing
(understandably) to make changes so close to a release.
What may be helpful would be a list of current work-arounds for each
compiler and where they are used so when a new patch comes out, we have
a shorter list of items that need looking at to see if the work-around
is still needed, or if it has been fixed in the latest patch.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk