Subject: Re: [boost] Build breaking changes
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-04-03 01:30:37
On 30/03/2018 07:48, Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Difficulty with one particular IDE does not count as a valid reason to
> stick with 32-bit x86 to me.
While the above is true, having the most popular compiler and IDE of the
platform default to 32-bit does argue very strongly to *not stop*
building 32-bit by default _on Windows_.
Thus I stand by what I said before -- building both 32 and 64 is the
best default choice for VC++ binaries on Windows. For mingw64 and
Linux, other default choices may make more sense.
If others prefer that the default should only ever to be to compile one
address-model (which is not my preference), then the default for Windows
should be 32, not 64. Because while it might be older and does have
some deficiencies, it is *still* the default for the platform as a
whole. (This is independent of the OS architecture itself.)
So, at least for Windows, as a default, in my opinion: 32+64 > 32 > 64.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk