David Abrahams wrote:
Russell Hind <rhind@mac.com> writes:
[...]
Yes, but we have a very functional set of libraries in boost-1.30.2 and boost-1.31.0 so why not say older compilers are stuck to using these versions of boost? We're not saying they can't use boost, just not the latest version?
Might be a good idea. I think I'd like to continue to support vc6 at least on the 1.31.x branch, particularly because last-minute changes in the graph library broke Boost.Python on vc6 for 1.31.0
What would we do about Borland, which is in some ways more broken than vc6? They don't ship a compiler I wouldn't consider broken. What about GCC 2.9Xes, which are standard equipment on some widely-used Linux distros? Way less broken than either of those two compilers, but still way out-of-date...
I think most distros finally switched to gcc 3. I also think dropping gcc 2.9x support would hit fewer developers than dropping VC6 support (mostly due to the fact that gcc 3 has been around for some time). However, I didn't conduct a survey. I think it would be reasonable not to support gcc 2.9x in future Boost releases. Regards, m