Subject: Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers
From: Isidor Zeuner (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-16 21:36:37
> > But why not make a boost trunk clone on gitorious.org and
> > start a
> > boost stable branch yourself? It would probably need some
> 3. Boost is configured mostly with defines. So upgrade of compiler
> version for gcc-4.3 to gcc-4.4 may break ABI just because
> some new feature comes and something is changed in class layout.
Ok, I better understand your approach now.
But I also have to say that this shows yet again how a boost::stable
design may be fundamentally different from what boost does: one great
use is to abstract away many compiler differences. If boost was to be
binary stable and still serve this purpose, this would mean that for
one buggy compiler boost supports, all compilers would have to pay the
price because the ABI must be designed in a way to be able to
incorporate the particular workaround.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk