From: Daryle Walker (dwalker07_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-23 03:04:47
On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 8:20 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
> Jarl Friis <jarl_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> All true. Unfortunately, 2.96 was released by RedHat with one
>>> popular version of Linux, which makes it (in many peoples' eyes) an
>>> important compiler to support anyway.
>> I will in line with the announcement suggest that any support needed
>> for or related to this particular gcc version should be redirected to
>> the supplier of the compiler (i.e. redhat).
> That's a very nice way to avoid extra work for Boost library
> developers which they shouldn't have to do in the first place, but
> since RedHat isn't actually going to do anything for users, leaves
> them in the cold.
I don't think we support beta versions of compilers, so why should we
support a version of a compiler that its creators (AFAIK) don't even
support? For example, if a Boost incompatibility is the fault of the
GCC 2.96 complier, are we supposed to figure out the internal
difficulties and corrections/workarounds that even GCC.org won't bother
Anyway, support for certain compiler versions seem to fade as new
versions are released (e.g. we don't really support CodeWarrior Pro 5.x
or MSVC++ 5.x). Do we even support GCC 2.95 that much? The user can
resolve the problem by downloading the 2.95 or 3.x versions, which
gains the user a lot more support, especially if the resolution to a
Boost incompatibility is beyond our ability to fix (like a compiler
> I am noticing a theme in your postings today: you seem remarkably
> unsympathetic to anyone who hasn't made what you consider to be the
> "right" choice of software systems. At Boost we *generally* try not
> to hold these kinds of missteps against our users, because we're more
> interested in seeing our software widely used than in avoiding the
> hassles of platform dependencies; I don't think you're going to change
> that culture with a few postings (at least I hope not)!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk