2017-03-11 15:41 GMT+01:00 Andrzej Krzemienski
2017-03-11 15:27 GMT+01:00 Paul A. Bristow via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org>:
John Maddock has since explained why nothing I tried worked. I'm a bit shocked that it hasn't been tested on MSVC. My acceptance was on the assumption that it would work. It really must be portable over recent GCC, Clang and MSVC at the very minimum.
According to formal Boost criteria, it is sufficient for the library to work on two major compilers. These formal criteria are met by safe_numerics. Of couse, I acknoledge, that formal criteria are not the ony thing in the world.
I suggest that we should pause the review until you adopt John's patches and reissue the review code and then restart the review.
From the formal point of view, the two options for this I can see are:
- To conclude the review as rejected, and schedule a new one. - Accept the library conditionally, and make the fix a hard condition/
It'll be a bit poor to accept the library until a few people confirm it's
working on MSVC.
Accepting the library does not mean it is immediately available in the next Boost release. If the library is accepted conditionally, you would be guaranteed that the users will get MSVC support (if adding this support is doable).
Regards, &rzej;
Still, it may be a good idea to implement the MSVC fix from John immediately, and give opportunity for people to test it for the next few days. Regards, &rzej;