From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-19 21:21:51
At 06:54 PM 12/19/2003, Andy Little wrote:
>I am not sure what the policy on code correctness at boost is, but in my
>book that means I would have to give an automatic
>"reject" vote to any design that doesnt actually work. ( I do understand
>that the problems are in dependent libs... but... cmon guys... get it
>sorted for VC7.1 please! ) ...
I don't think we have an explicit policy for what compilers a library has
to work on at time of formal review, and I don't think we want such a
policy just yet. While we should only accept libraries that we think are
portable, we should require actual testing unless we think there is a
serious question. It is too much work to ask of submitters who don't know
if their submission will be accepted.
But given that 100% of Boost's current libraries pass all tests on VC++ 7.1
with few or no workarounds, I'd hate to see a library go into a release
that wouldn't pass VC++ 7.1.
I expect both Metrowerks and Intel will also be passing 100% very soon with
few or no workarounds needed. As each compiler gets to that level, I think
we should start requiring that new libraries pass too. (Unless some new
technique, like enable_if, is discovered that doesn't work, or something
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk