From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-05 11:18:34
Edward Diener <eddielee_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>Martin Bonner wrote:
>>>>>I do not oppose dropping VC 6 and 7 from the list of "release"
>>>>I think it is too soon to drop VC 7.1 from the list of "release"
>>>I doubt that 7.1 would ever be dropped, as it's too close to conforming and
>>>VC 8 has some features that could hinder its acceptance.
>>>>(But VC7.0 could probably go).
>>>That's what I meant.
>> That sounds great to me. Now what about Borland (wrings hands like
>> Snively Whiplash)? If anything, that's harder to support than vc6 and
> I understand you are referring to past BCB compilers but I just want to
> note that Borland is putting out a new release of BCB in case Boost
> becomes interested. The product, part of the BDS 2006 suite, was
> supposed to come out December 1 but has been delayed for approximately a
> month, not a good sign, with the next exact date not given yet.
Right. The fabled EDG-based borland compiler is an old story, full of
disappointments. We can always change our mind about BCB later, but I
think we have to deal with the compilers we have /today/.
> I have made efforts to find out whether the new compiler will be more
> standard C++ compatible but this has been met by a wall of silence.
> Borland has pointedly said almost nothing about standard C++
> compatibility, while touting all the other IDE related features of the
> new release, and others who might be privy to this information on
> Borland's NG are bound by the NDA not to say anything until the product
> is released.
> Just a heads up in case no one from Boost is paying attention to
> this in the wake of MS's much touted Visual Studio 2005 and VC 8.0.
I'm not paying *a lot* of attention ;-)
-- 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