From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-04 17:55:57
"Reece Dunn" <msclrhd_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>>"Reece Dunn" <msclrhd_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> >>CW 7+. I think supporting CW6 should be declared beyond our scope,
>> >>but I guess you're using it.
>> > Thanks. CW6 has some issues with iterator adaptors
>> > (boost::reverse_iterator) but as I am relatively new to the CW tools
>> > I haven't had the chance to sort though this, although since CW6 is
>> > an old compiler I'm not too worried about this.
>>I don't understand; now it sounds like you don't care too much about
>>the old version -- or is it reverse_iterator that you don't care
> I am using CW6 because I don't currently own a later version. I care about
> CW6 in as much as it allows me to test my libraries using CodeWarrior (I
> know problems may arise on later versions).
I think you can download an eval version of 9.2 from MW.
> I am assuming most people have at least CW7 with most on CW8+,
I would assume most are on CW9. CW7 has some serious problems that
make it difficult to write template code for, notably that the sizeof
trick doesn't work.
> like you said in a previous post, therefore the Boost libraries will
> be dropping support CW6 like they are doing for VC6 (I know it is
> slightly different with VC6 WRT standards conformance, but the same
> principle applies).
I think few or no Boost libraries ever supported CW6. We started
testing against Metrowerks with version 7. Oh, I suppose Daryle
Walker was trying to support ancient CW versions for a while. But he
doesn't have many libraries.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk