Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compiler requirements.
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-04 22:54:39
on Sun Aug 04 2013, Stephen Kelly <steveire-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/03/2013 11:03 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> on Mon Jul 29 2013, Stephen Kelly <steveire-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>> My preference is increasing the compiler requirement, because that may open
>>> up more similar opportunities for reducing dependencies and
>>> interdependencies throughout boost.
>>> Grepping indicates that that means increasing the compiler requirements to
>>> something like __DMC__ > 0x840,
>> I'd be shocked if any version of that compiler worked with any
>> substantial fraction of the Boost codebase.
> Ok, then the patch I posted which was specific to that compiler should
> be fine.
>>> GCC > 3.2, BOOST_INTEL_CXX_VERSION > 500, VC++ > 7.0.
> What do you think about increasing the compiler requirement much more,
> as I wrote in another mail?
Well, it's not up to me, really. It /might/ be good for Boost, but I
would expect consensus to show us the right answer. I don't have a
strong personal feeling either way.
-- Dave Abrahams
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk