Subject: Re: [boost] [context] Don't hard-code the assembler
From: Oliver Kowalke (oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-08 04:18:09
2014-04-08 9:31 GMT+02:00 <pmenso57_at_[hidden]>:
> That is exactly what the rest of Boost has to do with C++ compilers.
> Workarounds and alternate implementations abound. I am fully aware of the
> burden this places on the typical Boost developer. Personally, I would
> prefer "unsupported" over fallback to a different toolset (or assumption of
> said toolset).
it is not exactly as with C++ - the C++ syntax is standardized and you have
to fix only the code on some small place for some C++ compilers.
with assembler I've to rewrite the complete code - for instance how values
are stored in a register varies from toolset to toolset, char defining a
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk