From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard (jbms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-28 17:52:38
David Abrahams wrote:
> Juanma Barranquero <jmbarranquero_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 13:03:36 -0400
>>David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>Well, that's self contradictory!
>>Not really. A bit later it says:
>>>On all x86 compatibles (Celeron, PIII, P4, Athlon, etc) you need gcc
>>>2.95.x or earlier, or gcc 3.1 or newer.
> I don't see what that has to do with the contradiction I quoted.
> First they say that GCCs newer than 2.95.x will be slower, then later
> they say that the fastest GCC they can find is 3.1.
I believe they are referring to newer versions of GCC v.2, i.e. versions
later than 2.95 but earlier than 3, such as 2.96. These versions were
not official releases; they were development snapshots of the progress
towards version 3. It is understandable, therefore, that they have
--- Jeremy Maitin-Shepard jbms_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk