From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-18 10:15:29
Peter Dimov wrote:
> Because I may want to? Why should I be prevented from supporting bcc if I so
> desire? Should I be forced to run my own regression tests in order to
> provide that support?
But to look at it another way: You may want to support bcc32 in your
library, but someone else may not want to support it in another library.
(e.g. spirit) for the next version of boost
I use both your library and spirit from boost. In the next version of
boost, spirit no longer supports bcc32 (as in 1.31.x) so I'm sticking
with 1.30.2 because I suddenly not all my code works with the new release.
I then have to start mixing versions of boost which is definitely a bad
thing IMHO. Hence the reason I'm sticking with 1.30.2 and not moving to
And I'm not going to try and force or even request every boost library
to support bcc32 (many already don't) such as lambda which I would love
The only way to stop the above happening is to force every current
library to always support the compilers it supports now. That may
severely hamper the development of the library which is a bad thing.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk