[boost] Re: 1.31.0 regressions

From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-13 06:02:44

Bronek Kozicki wrote:

> Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
>>Most compilers are now passing close to 100% of all tests. Hopefully,
>>with the next round of compiler updates, they will be passing every
>>test. Granularity on 100% passes brings no benefits
> 
> 
> That's still at least one year away from now, I think. And we need to
> think when to stop supporting MSVC6, GCC2.95, BCB6 etc. old compilers.
> As long as these compilers are supported, this granularity is usefull.
> 

I only speak for myself, but initially trying 1.31 in my fairly large 
project with BCB6 is crashing.  It looks as though I'm getting a dodgy 
result from a boost::function, which I haven't looked at carefully, but 
I think is due to compiler code generation bugs.  I do have other places 
where I get code gen bugs.  I don't have the time to investigate this, 
so I'm going to stick with 1.30.2 for the foreseeable future until I can 
upgrade to a different compiler (spirit in 1.31 already doesn't support 
bcc32 5.6) so what I'm trying to say is I wouldn't complain if future 
boost releases didn't support bcc32 anymore but I may well be alone in 
this opinion.

I've also got problems that I can no longer put file system headers into 
pre-compiled headers due to internal compiler errors and other little 
niggles.  All I think due to compiler bugs, but as I said, don't really 
have the time to investigate now so am happy to stick with 1.30.2.

As spirit has done, you do have to stop support for non-conforming 
compilers at some point, and 1.30.2 and 1.31 are very functional 
versions of boost, so maybe a good point to stop having to put all the 
work-arounds in.

Cheers

Russell