Gennadiy Rozental a écrit :
I personally don't see the problem in saying that in order to get VC6 (and GCC2.95) support for boost use version 1.33, and have VC6 be unsupported in version 1.34.
I believe this is very important point:
By saying that particular compiler isn't supported in release a.b we saying just that. Anyone is free to use existent working version of the library for this compiler. But for future development we do not want to support this anymore. So we drop it from regression testing and get read of all workarounds.
Well, why not. I agree that for users already using boost, that might be acceptable (except maybe for bug fixes, I do not know of they would be handled for older versions of boost). For users new to boost, or in the process of switching to boost, it might refrain them from doing so, at least until they have improved their compiler. Anyway, that would probably require some improvents of the documentation such as an easily available page on the web site that states that for compiler A, one should use boost version B, and can find the associated documentation online at url C (sorry to say so, but I never got anything out of the doc folder of the distribution, never tried really hard though, so I usually browse the doc online). I guess I'm not the only one.
Getting said that, my position is that there is no since anymore to produce/support workarounds for the ancient compilers. We should just make a clear break and move toward more conformant ones.
-- Loïc