Subject: Re: [boost] [1.58.0] Release candidates available
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-06 11:30:58
Beman Dawes wrote:
> Likewise, why isn't the default a 64-bit build on a 64-bit system?
Because you may want the software you're developing to run on 32 bit OSes,
which is still the most common use case on Windows.
Ideally, you need the default on Windows to be to build both, but the
address model is not encoded in the name, so that's not possible at present.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk