Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Andre> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:28:04PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
| Andre> wrote:
>>> | boost is starting to be a PITA much as XTL was before its time
>>> and | beyond readily available compilers.
>>>
>>> But now the compilers are available...
>
| Andre> One real world example: Konni got her first official g++ 2.95
| Andre> at work about a week ago. Standard desktop is still SuSE 6.1
| Andre> there. This is from the time of Redhat 5.2 or so. And people
| Andre> are very reluctant to upgrade anything, let alone crucial
| Andre> things like OS or compilers.
>
| Same at INRIA. Digital workstations are with gcc 2.95.2, and linux
| ones recently got upgraded to rh7.1.
Do you _really_ think that we should always cater to the gcd of our
_users_ (and incompetent sysadmins... why upgrade to rh 7.1 when rh
7.2 has been out for half a year) ? Hey... lets move back to gcc 2.7.3
Both of these examples is something that I dismiss outright as invalid
arguements.
--
Lgb
