Re: [boost] [Config] Big changes in C++0x detection...

Subject: Re: [boost] [Config] Big changes in C++0x detection...
From: Noah Roberts (roberts.noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-17 18:09:40

On 3/17/2011 11:13 AM, Michael Fawcett wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Daniel Walker
> <daniel.j.walker_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Eric Niebler<eric_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>>> On 3/17/2011 11:29 PM, Noah Roberts wrote:
>>>> On 3/16/2011 1:53 PM, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
>>>>> Please report such bugs through Microsoft Connect instead of suffering
>>>>> in silence. If they affect you as a Boost developer or Boost user,
>>>>> please explain that too - it helps us to understand the impact of a bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously we try to find and fix bugs ourselves, but submitting bug
>>>>> reports helps us help you. :->
>>>>
>>>> I tried that route as have several others.  Official response was, "We
>>>> know, suck it."
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Haha! And hear hear! Stephan, I frequently file bugs through the Connect
>>> website. Sometimes I wonder why because almost without exception they're
>>> closed "Won't Fix".
>>
>> Ditto. I've had the same experience.
>>
>> http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/571720/c-use-of-member-template-causes-internal-compiler-error
>
> This seems like an entirely reasonable response.  I've heard similar
> responses from Boost Release Managers on this mailing list.
>
>>> A humble suggestion: issue compiler patches out of band. And if you're
>>> going to ask people to file bugs, fix them.
>>
>> +1
>
> Pot meet kettle?  Boost has the same issues, in fact 1.46.1 is the
> first point release in a long time, even when it was desperately
> needed in the past.  It has tickets that languish for years in Trac.
> Stephan seems to stay up to date with this list and seems to genuinely
> try to better Visual Studio.  I can't see why he is being piled on.

Well, I for one wasn't piling on anyone.  I was simply mentioning some 
facts about decltype in 2010 having bugs as a possible reason why some 
boost authors might not want to rely on it.  I didn't even realize 
Stephan was a part of the MS group when I replied to his suggestion to 
post a bug, I was simply stating that it had been done albeit with some 
frustration.  The fact that I and other MS users don't exactly feel 
listened to is probably not something he can do anything about.

As a professional developer I can understand triage.  Being told to 
submit a bug when you already did and where told it was a known, non-fix 
issue though is mildly frustrating and I responded in some jest (though 
I do sometimes get the feeling "suck it, we know you have to use it 
anyway" is the MS-mantra).  Certainly wasn't trying to single anyone out 
for blame or abuse.

What bugs get fixed is usually guided more by what users will put up 
with than what the developers think is important anyway, as we're 
probably all very aware.