Subject: Re: [boost] Changes to VS 2012 config
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-01 02:20:17
On December 1, 2012 9:34:41 AM Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> So here's the scoop from Herb. There are two separate things: the
> rolling releases (like the just-released Update 1 which added XP support
> to VS'12), and the CTP releases (like the one that just that added
> variadic templates to the compiler). The former are officially
> supported, go-live products; the latter are not. There is, and should
> be, *no expectation* that the features delivered in the CTP releases
> will ever make it into the officially supported updates.
> On other words, we should operate under the assumption that there will
> be no improvements in C++11 compliance of any officially supported
> Microsoft compiler until the next major release of Visual Studio.
> I worded that very carefully. I believe it is 100% accurate. I will be
> directing Herb's attention to this thread so that he can comment if I
> got anything wrong.
> What that means for Boost is up for us to decide. But given the above, I
> think it would be wise for us to add support for the CTP releases to
> Boost.Config using _MSC_FULL_VER so that we don't have to wait until
> VS.Next to start taking advantage of variadic templates (for example).
I disagree. If CTP is not an indication of a feature support in the
official compiler, why should we support it? Adding workarounds for CTP
bugs is probably reasonable but not new features. OTOH the rolloing
releases give new features the official status, and we can be sure they
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk