From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-10 02:25:53
Firingme <firingme_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]>
>> Does that prove that VC7.1 is worse? It's trully sad that people jump
>> to the conclusion that a compiler is better by virtue of it being able to
>> compile this or that library without considering how much gunk was written
>> to workaround various compiler quirks to make them happy.
> The Problem is not VC7.0 "being able to compile this or that library
> considering how much gunk was written".
> C1001 Error is
> ---------Compiler Internal Error---------
> that says if you receive a C1001 error, you can't do anything to work around
Oh yes you can! Library writers workaround ICEs everytime! It's just
tedious and a royal pain in the rear.
> and I also
> think that it express that the Compiler is not stablity enough !
Are you saying that VC7 is more stable than VC7.1? Wow, that's new!
Try to count the number of workarounds for VC6, VC7 and VC7.1
in a modern library such as, say, MPL, and you'll be surprised.
> As far as I know, there have been many people have send there complain to MS
> with this *fatal* BUG !
VC6 and VC7 ICEs like crazy! Luckily, for you, library writers spend countless
hours finding workarounds to these nasty ICEs.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk