Boost logo

Boost Interest :

From: Doug Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-27 00:18:53

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:39 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Doug Gregor wrote:
>> I suggest that the vast majority of users should be using the
>> multi-threaded versions; those that truly will only use Boost in
>> single-threaded environments and are copying shared_ptrs so often that
>> their performance is at risk can flip the right switches to build
>> Boost differently. Few people need that freedom, so the rest of the
>> users shouldn't pay for it with more complexity.
> OK, agreed. Now do you think that auto-linking makes mangling make
> sense on Windows, or should we drop it there, too?

That's a much, much tougher call, because the situation is different
on Windows for a couple reasons:
  - We don't have propert DLL versioning (unless I'm missing something)
  - At least one major vendor makes it insanely easy to build
link-incompatible code (*cough* _SECURE_SCL *cough*)

  - Doug

Boost-cmake list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at