From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-03 12:18:30
"Powell, Gary" <powellg_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > Of course, I don't have that many compilers to try, either.
> > Maybe if I had access to some better compilers, I would
> > get farther.
> Well the members of boost have access to lot of compilers, so you
> would get instant feedback. One of the major advantages of boost.
> Plus as Dave A. mentions there is a lot of porting expertise among
> the members.
Yes, but you guys make it sound like I've been hiding the code in my
dungeon. It's been sitting in the sandbox like a lonely red-headed
stepchild since I first got access to it. In fact, I believe at some
point, I asked people to try it out on other compilers, but it seemed
that nobody was interested.
> But I understand the need to not build the initial design by
> committee, you could end up with another "string" class interface!
;> Actually, I've managed to do that all by myself!! Anyway, it's way
past "initial design" stage, since SmartPtr was already a fully formed
library when I started. All I've been trying to do is get it to compile
on something other than gcc.
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk