From: Russell Hind (rh_gmane_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-06 03:32:48
Robert Ramey wrote:
> Given this, along with the fact that library authors actually do
> have varying support for different compilers make the whole
> discussion irrelevant.
> Example, the serialization library compiles and passes almost all
> test with bcb 5.51. Who is to tell me that it should or should not
> do that.
This is useful, but the trouble we run in to is that one library drops
support for a compiler in a particular version and no matter what other
libraries still support that compiler, we can't move to a later release
because we depend on a library that the author has dropped support for.
So given 99% of the libraries still support our compiler, the fact that
one library now doesn't means none of that version of boost is useful to us.
Also, there never seems to be a dead-easy way for an end user to find
out which libraries dropped/added support for which compilers in
We got hit by this because ublas dropped support for Borland in 1.32.0.
I've managed to get bits of ublas working in 1.32.0 now so we have
moved to it, but this doesn't look possible for 1.33.0 so we are now
stuck on BCB6 and 1.32.0.
I realise this isn't boot's (or its developers) fault that Borland
haven't managed to increase the conformance of their compiler, but it
would be very helpful if there was more information easily available to
which libraries support which compilers and especially in the main
release notes when compilers get added/dropped.