Re: [Boost-users] [Context] Mac OS X support?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Context] Mac OS X support?
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-09 20:46:01

Nat Linden wrote:
> Anyway -- it seems likely to me that Boost.Context will support Mac OS
> X 10.5+ "out of the box." I intend to check that.
> 
> If it's important for Boost.Context to support Mac OS X <= 10.4, it
> might be fairly straightforward to implement the Boost.Context API on
> top of Pth. Reference [2] contains my macro-based attempt to establish
> equivalences between the ucontext API and the Pth API.
> 
> However, at this moment in history, one must ask how important it
> still is to support Mac OS X <= 10.4?

I'm completely ignorant about today's marketshare of Mac OS X 10.4, but I 
can tell you I'd rather like to see it supported for a while. Personally, 
I own an i686 machine with Mac OS X 10.6 and a PPC machine with Mac OS X 10.4. 
The latter is quite old and won't be able to pull anything more modern than 
10.4. Therefore my only option for PPC testing is under Mac OS X 10.4. Since 
Apple's switch to x86 is historically close to the release of 10.5 this is 
probably true for more developers.

Another, perhaps more general reason to support 10.4 is that, compared to 
both the older and the newer versions of Mac OS X it's still quite usable. 
I can't very well imagine anyone still using 10.3 but 10.4 doesn't seem 
strange. My (vague) impression is that some software suppliers still attempt 
to support 10.4 for this reason.

Of course, both of these "arguments" could be easily overridden by some decent 
marketshare statistics.

(Completely unrelated: hi, I'm Julian. This is my first post to the Boost users 
list.)

(About equally related: what is the best way to reply to an existing thread? 
The instructions in the digest header don't seem to care much as long as you make 
sure that the subject field is correct. The Boost mailing lists website on the 
other hand suggests that one should rather not reply to digests at all and rather 
use per-message mailing or reply through the GMane web interface. Any opinions on 
this matter would be greatly appreciated.)