From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-30 21:25:14
I am not sure I do understand the issue at hand completely so I would
appreciate to be corrected if my assumptions are wrong.
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> "AlisdairM" <alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>> Didn't we decide to drop ancient compilers?
>> Not yet, but we never officially defined what it means to support a
>> compiler either.
> Well, lets consider this a first big step in this direction. If we dont make
> this step at some point we will be stack where we are forever.
I can feel your pain but Boost.Test is probably the least suitable
library to make any steps in this direction. At least for those parts
that involve the boost regression testing. AFAICS we need to be able to
run regression tests on VC6 for the foreseeable future.
>> There is certainly a growing feeling their time has come, but no
>> definitive list yet.
> I have this feeling for several releases now. 7.1 may soon become
I strongly disagree with this.
> I do not see any reason to still support 6.5.
Well, what about: It is widely used?
> And if I will have time before the end of release cycle I will remove 2.95
> workarounds either.
Again I'd like to ask you to not make any changes that impair our
ability to do regression testing on 2.95
-- Thomas Witt witt_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk