From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-09 20:52:07
"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>I think the whole idea of providing the test matrix as a guide to
> which compilers work with which libraries is misguided.
> Installation procedure should include a local test procedure
> which builds the test matrix for the user's local environment.
> This was my motivation for "library_status" executable and
> script. This would give a couple of advantages over the current
I am not sure I agree with that. I would expect at least 8 out of 10 boost
users not willing to spend hours after downloading and unpacking the library
(which already takes quite some time) to see how boost fairs for their
compilers. After all we don't expect significant differences in between
closly matching confgurations. It does indeed looks like nice to have
feature, but definetly not a replacement for compiler status pages for
configurations we test against.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk