[boost] Re: How bugs fixing policy works in boost?

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-15 11:12:49

The report suggested changes in a serialization library header and a config
header for VC 7.1.

I concluded that the issue with the serialization library was a valid one -
although it didn't show up in any testing, and removed some leftover useless
code.

Another suggestion was to define BOOST_NO_ARGUMENT_DEPENDENT_LOOKUP for VC
7.1 .

a) I didn't feel sufficiently knowledgable to evaluate such  a proposal.
b) It seemed (and still seems) pretty radical to me.
c) Such a change would have to be made only after thorough investigation of
any vagarities in VC 7.1 implementation of ADL.  I suspect that no one has
been able to justify this effort.

Robert Ramey

"Vyacheslav E. Andrejev" <vandrejev_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:cn9jjv$thq$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Some time ago I've posted some bugs in date_time, and format libraries.
There is no answer, there is no fix, there is no any reaction at all. The
only two authors reacts and have applied suggested fixes: Hartmut Kaiser has
fixed problem with select_p in spirit and Robert Ramey has partially fixed
problem with ADL and vc7.1 in serialization. All others bugs are unanswered.
But release is going to be issued. Why this? What is the bugs policy?
Release is going to contain known bugs?
>
> --
> Vyacheslav E. Andrejev
> System Architect, Excelsior, LLC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>