| 1 |
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:47:09 -0600 Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| > * Hard dep upon g++-4.1, which isn't available for all archs. This |
| 4 |
| > doesn't even work because there's no guarantee that >=4.1 is being |
| 5 |
| > used even if it's installed. |
| 6 |
| |
| 7 |
| I haven't done my homework, so I'll just ask: Is there a reasonable |
| 8 |
| timeframe for 4.1 on archs that we're using? Is there actual evidence |
| 9 |
| that tr1-using packages are going to become prevalent before 4.1+ |
| 10 |
| becomes ubiquitous? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
A few archs are having pretty big issues with 4.1. In the mean time, |
| 13 |
tr1 is so damned useful that programmers are going to take a lot of |
| 14 |
persuading *not* to use it. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
| An alternative, which would be a real pain, is to have <g++-4.1 |
| 17 |
| ebuilds build boost tr1 libraries as part of the ebuild, and then |
| 18 |
| have compatibility libraries for people who remove old versions of |
| 19 |
| g++, just like we do now. The benefit would be that at the cost of |
| 20 |
| forcing everybody to upgrade g++ we could rely on tr1 existing |
| 21 |
| everywhere. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Even that won't necessarily work, since g++-4.1 doesn't include a full |
| 24 |
tr1 implementation. It includes the useful stuff, but it's missing the |
| 25 |
random number and regex parts of the specification -- which, |
| 26 |
fortunately, are nowhere near as popular as hash tables and smart |
| 27 |
pointers. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 31 |
Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org |
| 32 |
Web : http://ciaranm.org/ |
| 33 |
Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ |
Archives