Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-07 22:19:46

Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden]> writes:

>> Deprecating a platform boost-wide, rather than on a per-library basis,
>> seems the best balance to me. I know which Boost version is stable and
>> tested, I can rely on most libraries in that version, and library
>> authors understand what is expected (but not required) of them. The
>> all important recovery-action for the user is simple - install the
>> version of Boost pointed at by the deprecation message.
> I don't agree. This would work if all the library authors supported the
> same set of compilers. As this is not the case there is no single
> version of Boost that the deprecation message can reasonably refer to.
> The real solution for this problem is something that Boost will have to
> face sooner or later and that is breaking the distribution into a set of
> more manageable elements.

No, really, the solution is for Borland to fix their compiler, or for
market pressure to drive everyone to drop it. Let's keep things in

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

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