Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Running regression tests for msvc-14.2 (preview)
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-02-27 15:48:01

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 08:49, Gavin Lambert via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>

> On 27/02/2019 18:35, degski wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 06:19, Gavin Lambert wrote:
> >
> >> It probably should be better about reporting use of unknown versions --
> >> this is the third query I've seen about this recently.
> >
> > We went there already, no? No, that's where we came from in fact. That
> [see
> > those warnings pop up the whole time] wasn't very helpful either.
> No, that was different. Previously Boost.Config would show a warning
> that it didn't know what the compiler was, which wasn't particularly
> helpful. (Although part of that was that it didn't identify the source
> of the message very clearly.)
> What I was suggesting is a warning/error from Boost.Build itself stating
> that the version explicitly specified in the user-config.jam file is
> "wrong", as this is a more direct configuration error.
> Having said that, what might be even better is that if a higher number
> than supported is specified, it (both Boost.Build and
> Boost.Predef/Config) could use the same settings as the highest one it
> does know about (but still use the specified version number in the
> library naming conventions, to maintain side-by-side deployment and
> reduce compatibility confusion).

Yes, you're right on all counts. The best thing would be to allow for minor
versions [with the behavior as you described], but give a compile error on
major versions, though. Major version change implies an ABI-break, without
testing, it's not sure what will happen.


*"Big boys don't cry" - **Eric Stewart, Graham Gouldman*

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at