From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-12 14:45:10
Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:
> From: Jonathan Wakely <cow_at_[hidden]>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:55:37AM -0400, Rob Stewart wrote:
> What's to stop any compiler from using a 3 digit version number
> sometime in the future? Yes, GCC has moved on to 4.x, so there's
> no 3.x version even close to that, and there aren't likely to be
> (m)any more 2.x releases, but if you are going to choose a
> convention, it ought to account for forseeable problems, right?
Unless it makes things too hard to read. With typically seven digits
in a number it gets hard to divide them into groups of 3.
Note that all the numbers above are wrong because they're octal. You
can't use a leading zero, so typically we'll be looking at 5 digits.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk