Subject: Re: [boost] Encoding address-model in library names
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-05 22:08:13
On 05.07.2017 18:02, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
> On 7/5/17 15:43, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>>> Furthermore, my answer to the last question depends on whether this is
>>> an optional feature or a compulsory change. In case of the latter, I'm
>>> against the change.
>> Special-casing Boost.Python to not support this feature would be a
>> hassle and a bit hostile to its users, relegating them to a second
>> class, but it's doable.
> Having a library that works differently for naming than all the rest
> seems like a non-starter to me.
> If the community decides the change is good then it should be for all
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk