From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-25 10:21:31
At Tuesday 2003-11-25 05:13, you wrote:
>Though I appreciate efforts which lead to portable code,
>an Expression Template libaray has a lot of automatically
>included brain damage already _without_ support for broken
>So I plan to take a path inbetween, since I am
>not willing to "apply them all"
>The rationale for a large number of
>is "Borland C++ cannot eat this" or "VC6 is to blame"
>I am not going to support VC6 anyway, but for Borland ...
I applaud that decision and personally wouldn't go out of my way for vc7.0
vc7.1 (also known as .net2003) is clearly readily available. IMO, support
for "old" compilers just gives the vendors an excuse to not fix their
product, and users an excuse to do the same when updated become available.
>1) Does the _latest_ version of Borland C++
>still have some of the issues described in
>2) Are there any estimates about the percentage
>of Borland C++ compiler users compared to Intel C++
>(The 2 compilers I plan to support in all case)
>Build your own Expression Template Library with Daixtrose!
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk