On 2/28/2015 5:50 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
Peter Dimov-2 wrote
Edward Diener wrote: We should drop VC++6/7, bcc32, dmc, old sun support from MPL to make it more maintainable - provided that it is going to be maintained at all, or course.
Wouldn't be best just to leave this question to the person who actually takes responsibility for doing the maintenance? In practical terms, the best usage of one's time is to address that stuff that's broken and leave the other stuff alone. Supporting compilers over a certain vintage shouldn't be a requirement, but neither should it be a requirement that a library NOT support an older compiler or that it be (re) implemented using some newer version. The operative principle is
a) that it respect the current/traditional interface unless there is a good reason to break it. b) that it work with some defined set of recent compilers.
The rest is up to the person responsible for the library.
There is no one person responsible for MPL anymore AFAIK. In fact I think the Boost maintenance team also access to change it.
What I don't want to see implemented is the concept of "drive-by" maintenance whereby someone makes a "fix" and moves on. There has to be some particular person who takes responsibility for consistency and continuity.
Robert Ramey