Boost logo

Boost :

From: Loïc Joly (loic.joly_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-31 05:04:53

Gennadiy Rozental a écrit :
>>I personally don't see the problem in saying that in order to get VC6 (and
>>GCC2.95) support for boost use version 1.33, and have VC6 be unsupported
>>version 1.34.
> I believe this is very important point:
> By saying that particular compiler isn't supported in release a.b we saying
> just that. Anyone is free to use existent working version of the library for
> this compiler. But for future development we do not want to support this
> anymore. So we drop it from regression testing and get read of all
> workarounds.

Well, why not. I agree that for users already using boost, that might be
acceptable (except maybe for bug fixes, I do not know of they would be
handled for older versions of boost). For users new to boost, or in the
process of switching to boost, it might refrain them from doing so, at
least until they have improved their compiler.

Anyway, that would probably require some improvents of the documentation
such as an easily available page on the web site that states that for
compiler A, one should use boost version B, and can find the associated
documentation online at url C (sorry to say so, but I never got anything
out of the doc folder of the distribution, never tried really hard
though, so I usually browse the doc online). I guess I'm not the only one.

> Getting said that, my position is that there is no since anymore to
> produce/support workarounds for the ancient compilers. We should just make a
> clear break and move toward more conformant ones.


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