Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15]
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 10:55:26AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Thanks for the compliment. Do you have any idea how much development
> time and goodwill it takes away from your project if you try to
> support > 1 C++ compiler? Remember that Lily started six years ago.
> Been there, done that, it was a nightmare*), so we chose to only
> support gcc. In retrospect, using C++ was probably a bad choice.
I'm not suggesting compiler bugs should be supported; I'm generally
against that. It's not your problem if people have broken compilers
(even if they can't upgrade them), and I'm not suggesting people go out
of their way for that case, any more than I'd suggest working around the
version bug you're dealing with now.
Even if you only care about G++, using feature tests is more effective
than version tests, since it's far more likely to simply work with newer
versions of the compiler (and libraries) that you havn't got to yet.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com