From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-27 16:18:59
On Jun 27, 2004, at 3:40 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
> Doug Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> The graph library has always been in a "barely usable" support on
>> certain compilers (Borland <= 5.6.4 and MSVC 6.0, in particular). The
>> regression tests have always been a mess---Boost 1.31.0 has very few
>> passes for these compilers, and 1.32.0 isn't looking any
>> better. However, the library is somewhat usable, if you stick to a
>> very small subset and don't mind working around INTERNAL COMPILER
>> ERRORs all of the time. What to do?
>> I'm marking the library "unusable" on both compilers, so that we can
>> concentrate our efforts on those compilers that might actually
>> work. Complain loudly, quickly, and preferably with patches if you
>> think this is the wrong approach.
> Well, Boost.Python supports vc6 and uses Boost.Graph to do so. If
> you mark the library unusable, will all effort to keep the parts used
> by Boost.Python working with vc6 be stopped?
As it stands, the Boost.Python tests that rely on Boost.Graph are the
only tests of the BGL that actually tell us anything meaningful about
VC6. Very few of the actual BGL tests pass on that compiler; even the
"simple" things (BFS, DFS) aren't really tested because the compiler
ICEs. So marking the lib "unusable" will keep us from expending a huge
amount of effort to get these tests up running and will discourage
users from trying something that will inevitably drive them insane;
we'll still maintain enough compatibility for Boost.Python to work.
I'd like to hear Jeremy's views on VC6 support as well...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk