8 Apr
2014
8 Apr
'14
8:18 a.m.
2014-04-08 9:31 GMT+02:00
That is exactly what the rest of Boost has to do with C++ compilers. Workarounds and alternate implementations abound. I am fully aware of the burden this places on the typical Boost developer. Personally, I would prefer "unsupported" over fallback to a different toolset (or assumption of said toolset).
it is not exactly as with C++ - the C++ syntax is standardized and you have to fix only the code on some small place for some C++ compilers. with assembler I've to rewrite the complete code - for instance how values are stored in a register varies from toolset to toolset, char defining a comment varies etc.