Re: [boost] Should we still be testing GCC 2.95.3?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-13 15:01:08

"AlisdairM" <alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> No developers need us to play nice with Borland in 1.34.  Anyone
>> currently using Boost could stick with 1.33.
>
> The difference between BCB and MSVC6 and GCC 2.95 is that Borland are
> still releasing compilers.

MS and GCC are not?

> There is a new Borland compiler out that will not work with Boost
> out-the-box because workarounds need updating for the version check.

Ick.

> Not all code is written with BOOST_TESTED_AT, and some code makes
> assumptions that Borland finally gave up with the last compiler.

Silly, naive code!

> If Boost stop taking workarounds, Borland customers have the option of
> staying with Boost 1.33 AND THE OLD COMPILER, or migrating their whole
> codebase to another toolchain - which is not very appealing when your
> entire GUI is designed around the Borland libraries.
>
> My guess is that most customers where it was economical to migrate to
> another vendor have already done so, given the last 4 years lack of
> support from Borland.  Most of the rest really need both the continued
> compiler fixes, and ongoing boost support for those existing libraries
> that compile today.

Ongoing meaning, "use BOOST_TESTED_AT once and be done with it"
Unless, of course, Borland decides to break something new :)

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com