On 2006-05-06, AlisdairM <alisdair.meredith@uk.renaultf1.com> wrote:
Further to the ublas patches, I'd also like to look at back-porting your bcbboost work to the 1.32 branch which would enable us to possibly move to BDS2006 with boost-1.32.x. Playing devil's advocate here! What is the benefit of doing this in the main Boost CVS, as opposed to
Russell Hind wrote: maintaining another bcbboost_1_32? I doubt we are going to see another patched release of Boost 1.32 at this point, the regression testing cost alone is likely prohibitive.
There is something else that has to be considered: if you release bcbboost you don't have to worry about introducing regressions in to the other, supported, compilers. Your workarounds can be ones that would *never* be accepted as part of the main boost because of the breakages they would introduce. As you say, it will be much simpler to QA a release aimed just at this compiler. Speaking as somebody who got stuck on a crappy compiler with a specific version of boost for 3 years, I can sympathise with seeing all the wonderful new libraries being added to boost and not being able to use them :-) phil -- change name before "@" to "phil" for email