Re: [Boost-users] RTTI for VC 6

From: Victor A. Wagner Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-15 20:16:18

whatever
ALL I said was that the plethora of errors was VC++6.0 NOT boost and you go 
make a "federal case" over it.
get OVER it.... VC6 is a very bad compiler
it was upgraded by the manufacturer 2 years ago
your continued use of it is foolish
now THERE is a personal insult...just for you...original my message was 
solely about the compiler why you had to bitch about it is certainly beyond 
MY comprehension.

Oh, you _still_ haven't told me WHY you stick with such a poor tool.

At Sunday 2004-08-15 16:24, you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Victor A. Wagner Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]>
>To: <boost-users_at_[hidden]>
>Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 6:41 AM
>Subject: Re: [Boost-users] RTTI for VC 6
>
>
> > from the message I originally responded to:
> > "There might have been a warning, but Boost produces so many other
>warnings
> > that I missed the warning if there was one."
>
>That is a statement of fact. That is not what I call dumping. What I call
>dumping is being critical in a manner that expresses emotions.

exactly WHAT is emotional about this:
"to put it bluntly, it's not boost, it VC++6.0
(the plethora of errors)
upgrading would save you and a lot of others a lot of problems"

> > I think it's unreasonable to expect anyone to continue to have to write
> > code for a crippled product.
>
>Note what was said about Borland. I think there are other examples also, but
>I can't find the relevant page that rates the various compilers. Do you know
>for a fact that VC 6 is worse than the others, or are you discriminating
>against VC 6 for some other reason? How well does the IBM compiler perform?

I don't know, nor is it relevant to THIS discussion

>Another relevant question is how well does the Gnu compiler rate when tested
>for support of Windows? As far as I know, it does not support Windows
>(runtime) as well as VC does. So before you criticize use of VC, please be
>sure that there are reasonable alternatives.

there are, and I even mentioned them   vs.net and vs.net2003 (the latter 
being preferred)

>  I think that if the Gnu
>compiler was as useful for Windows development as VC is, then there would be
>much more use of the Gnu compiler.

irrelevant

> > It's very
> > likely that I'll consider the management who made the decision to not
> > upgrade are the culprits.
>
>You are making an assumption that is incorrect.

You haven't answered by question.  You ass/u/med that I didn't care, and if 
you want to quote out of context you can make it sound like anything.

> > According to another message in this thread, Microsoft will drop support
>in
> > 46 days.
>
>I said nothing about Microsoft support of VC 6; someone else did, but I did
>not.

that IS relevant to whether VC6 is worth continuing to use!!

> > I posted where I thought you "dumped" on the warnings. the exact substring
> > to which I refer is:
> > "but Boost produces so many other warnings"
>
>Again, that is not what I call dumping. I should have used another term or
>method of saying what I meant to say. I really do think that your previous
>comments expressed your emotions about Microsoft and unfairly discriminated
>against Microsoft in a manner that is not relevant here.

You're the one that started this... I made a statement of fact...see the 
above (COMPLETE, not out of context) original reply

>  If the Microsoft VC
>6 complier is the most difficult one for the Boost libraries to support,
>then it is reasonable to discriminate against it. If not, then it is
>unproductive to discriminate against just Microsoft.

you just don't get it, do  you.  You bitch about a problem, I tell you that 
upgrading would save everyone a lot of time and you go ballistic.

>There is plenty to criticize Microsoft for, so please don't think I consider
>them to be perfect or totally innocent. One big problem is that in order to
>upgrade to .Net we must purchase a Visual Studio update, which is a
>significantly greater cost. Microsoft often churns us for updates that have
>much more than we really need. Further discussion of that could be done in
>another message or forum or whatever. The important thing is that you can't
>accomplish anything useful by criticizing my use of VC 6.

Like hell I can't accomplish anything.  your COMPILER is the source of your 
difficulties.  End of story.
and in 46 days, even Microsoft wont' support you.

>  Such comments
>can't improve the situation. Whatever you are trying to accomplish, there
>are more productive ways to do it.

apparently there aren't any more useful ways with you.  You seem stuck in a 
rut of using a 7 year old compiler and won't upgrade.

I'll say it again
upgrading will save everyone a lot of time and trouble.
statement of fact
no emotion

>_______________________________________________
>Boost-users mailing list
>Boost-users_at_[hidden]
>http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"