Subject: Re: [boost] [1.51][Release] Short release cycle
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-29 13:17:51
Sergey Cheban wrote:
> On 29.06.2012 18:39, Stewart, Robert wrote:
> >> The existence of old and unpopular compilers should not
> >> prevent the Boost from using the modern language features.
> >> Note that these compilers will never disappear.
> > Boost cannot afford to be so purist or there will be few
> > that use our libraries. We do, and must, drop support for
> > old compilers.
> > We should permit individual libraries to target only very
> > recent compilers, if the library author so chooses and there
> > is good reason.
> I think this is the case with boost.lockfree. It is not easy
> to implement it without atomics, and there are no atomics for
> the C++03 (yet).
I already suggested that Tim add Lockfree to trunk with only C++11 support, so you're arguing against the wind, I guess.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer using std::disclaimer;
Dev Tools & Components
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk