Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-05 22:43:39

On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 20:20:34 +0000 (UTC), AlisdairM wrote
> Reece Dunn wrote:
> > It may also be useful to make Boost.Config issue a warning that
> > compilers like BCB and VC6 are not officially supported if they are
> > removed from the supported list.
> As predominantly a BCB user, I obviously have a great concern about
> this! If the plan is to simply stop supporting these compilers, but
> leave all the existing workarounds in place, I would be very much
> against this move - obviously from pure self interest <G>

How about using old versions of Boost until BCB can compile newer ones?

> If the intent is to produce clearer maintainable libraries by stripping
> out the large number of workarounds for very broken compilers, then I
> could probably swallow my self interest in favour of a cleaner boost.

I'm kinda inclined to do this. There's a ton of ugliness to support these old
bad compilers. Problem is that getting rid of these doesn't get rid of all
the hacks. We have platforms like MINGW with gcc that work fine -- except for
the wide char support. Or the compilers that have weak or no dll support...

> As a final note, I could live with future libraries opting not to
> support these older compilers, but am worried about regressions
> losing support for the libraries we already have. It might be
> interesting to pull out a subset of libraries that will go above and
> beyond the call of duty to continue supporting these products -
> namely those that already make the effort today, and especially the
> TR1 libraries. How easy this would be to pull off in the regression
> testing reports I don't know, but if the trend is for future
> libraries we will soon have few libraries supported than not, and
> making the distinction will become more interesting.

Well, technically date-time is at mostly supported on some of these old
compilers. However, I've been saying for at least 6 months that 1.33 is the
last release I'm dealing with VC6. I'm more than happy to ditch Borland too.
   If someone really has to have an older library they can pull an older
version of Boost.

A couple of general points I'll make on this. To me the biggest benefit to
dropping these old compilers is the reduction in time spent running regression
tests, looking at failures, trying to find hacks, etc. The time spent on this
takes away from building new libraries, porting to new platforms, and
improving C++ libraries. So I'm strongly for this move away from the past --
glad to see it gathering steam...


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at