Doug Gregor wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:39 PM, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Doug Gregor wrote:
I suggest that the vast majority of users should be using the
multi-threaded versions; those that truly will only use Boost in
single-threaded environments and are copying shared_ptrs so often that
their performance is at risk can flip the right switches to build
Boost differently. Few people need that freedom, so the rest of the
users shouldn't pay for it with more complexity.
OK, agreed. Now do you think that auto-linking makes mangling make
sense on Windows, or should we drop it there, too?
That's a much, much tougher call, because the situation is different
on Windows for a couple reasons:
- We don't have propert DLL versioning (unless I'm missing something)
- At least one major vendor makes it insanely easy to build
link-incompatible code (*cough* _SECURE_SCL *cough*)
By 'drop' do you mean 'make non-default'? The ability to configure
mangling is in our cmake already, I think all you need here is sensible
defaults.
-t
_______________________________________________
Boost-cmake mailing list
Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake
