From: Nicola Musatti (Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-08 03:19:23
David Abrahams wrote:
> Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>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
Yes and no. It is true that had Borland kept the other vendors' pace we
wouldn't be discussing this issue at all; on the other hand I'm
convinced that my reasoning applies to al those that are stuck with
older versions of currently compliant compilers.
Again, it all boils down to actual numbers and available volunteers. The
fact that it isn't happening is a clear indication of how things stand :-)
As to the other reasons why modularization would be desirable (and the
problems it would entail!) it's a topic that deserves a thread of its
own, but I'm not going to start it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk