Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
Martin Sebor wrote:
I don't expect us to be dropping any platforms but it would be
nice to add more recent releases of the currently supported
compilers, such as aCC 3.80 and gcc 4.3.
For a patch release? I'd understand dropping support in major
release and possibly minor releases, and adding support in minor
releases, but I would think nothing would change, in terms of
supported platforms, between patch releases. Not that there
would be a problem with adding support in patch releases also;
just seems like a distinguishing factor between minor and patch
releases.
I thought we added platforms for 4.2.1 [aCC 6.16]?
We did. I see no problem with adding support in patch releases.
I don't know of any
others. Are there any that we'd like to add? Maybe AIX 6 if
and when we get it.
I noticed Intel C++ 10.1 is not on the list.
We didn't test with it so it wasn't a 4.2.1 target platform.
If we can get access to it let's add it for 4.2.2 (there's
a good chance that 4.2.1 works just fine with it).
That brings up another related issue. Do we need to identify
the exact version numbers? Or does HP C++ 6.16 for example
mean that any other versions of the 6.x compiler are
intentionally NOT supported?
There's no such thing as "supported" :)
The library is designed to be portable, out of the box, to all
conforming C++ compilers on all conforming POSIX systems, and
we make every effort to get it to compile with less than fully
conforming compilers as well. Because we can only test so many
listing the version of the compiler is intended to convey which
platform(s) we did (or will) test it on and where we know that
it works or not. The hope is that the library will compile and
work correctly on platforms that aren't listed (e.g., with gcc
4.1 on NetBSD).
Martin
