Re: [boost] Re: Named Template Parameters implementation

[Beman Dawes]

At 07:44 AM 11/18/2002, Dirk Gerrits wrote:

>Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>
>> >Even Microsoft will soon be supporting template template parameters and
>> >partial specialization.
>>
>>
>> How long more MSVC6 is going to be actively used, do you think? Is
>> there any
>> date/milestone since when we decide ignore non-supporting compilers for
>> specified features?
>
>Well AFAIK it has never been required that Boost libraries support
>'backwards' compilers. ISO/IEC 14882 compliant code would be acceptable.
>However, for usability, I agree that it is in everybody's best interest
>to support as many compilers as possible, which is what most Boost
>libraries do.

Yes, that's my view too.

The point I'm trying to make is that new designs shouldn't cripple themselves trying to support old compilers.

If it turns out the developer can apply a workaround so older compilers are supported, that's great. But not if it results in a sub-optimal design.

--Beman


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost