Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [general] What will string handling in C++ look like in the future [was Always treat ... ]
From: Chad Nelson (chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-19 14:30:07

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:22:34 +0000
Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>>> This is simply not going to happen. How could MS even go about
>>> doing this in Windows? It would make very single piece of Windows
>>> software incompatible with the next version!
>> That has never stopped them before -- see Windows 2.0 -> 3.0, Windows
>> 3.x -> Windows 95 (only partial compatibility), various versions of
>> WinCE/Windows
>> Mobile/whatever-marketingspeak-name-they're-using-this-year... ;-)
> I'm not convinced you're right about this. You only have to read The
> Old New Thing to see some of the remarkable (insane?) things MS do to
> retain backwards compatabiliy. I believe only the 64-bit versions of
> Windows Vista/7 ditch 16-bit program compatibilty - so you should be
> able to crack out those windows 3 programs on Windows 7 x86 and watch
> then run! :D

Yes, that answer was meant tongue-in-cheek. Microsoft got the
backward-compatibility religion (for the desktop, at least) around the
time they introduced Windows 95, because the only way to convince
people to buy it was to show them that their old programs would
continue to run. A few years ago they seemed to start drifting away
from that again, but they seem to have rediscovered the need for it.

Chad Nelson
Oak Circle Software, Inc.

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