Russell Hind <rhind@mac.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
I expect that dropping vc6 support in Boost.Python in the next couple of years would significantly reduce its audience, so I can't justify it, (maybe not until Python's standard Windows distribution drops VC6 also). That fact has caused me to implement vc6 support in other libraries that Boost.Python depends on. Thereafter, if the library breaks, it's a regression. It's viral :(
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 Way less broken than either of those two compilers, but still way out-of-date... -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com