Martin Slater wrote:
P.S. It still costs us all money to try to support
Oh and at no point did I say that I think boost should support vc6, regardless of that fact that it costs users (or us testers) nothing to support it except maybe a few more seconds to parse a couple of #def's or download a fraction more code. It costs the implementers time and that is there own personal choice at the end of the day; not yours, mine or anyone elses.
That's not correct. In fact, supporting VC6 or gcc 2 costs a lot of CPU time for the testers. It's not only the additional toolsets to run tests for (which could be considered a personal choice of the tester); more importantly, it's the frequency of changes to the source code in order to make modern code work for a bunch of broken compilers. These changes trigger rebuilds for *all* toolsets. Regards, m