On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Kenneth Heafield <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/22/11 15:15, Hieu Hoang wrote: >> OLPC - no problem, it's standard linux. >> iOS - depends on the boost libraries used, but probably gonna make it a >> no go for a while. >> Android - no chance. Not really good for C++ apps @ the mo anyway. > I have Boost installed on my Android phone. Doesn't everybody have > Gentoo in their pocket? (I cross-compiled on my desktop.) Point is > that you can compile Boost for ARM then statically link a Moses binary. > >> i hear what you & jon clark are saying about Boost. I have similar >> concerns about using up-to-date automake. However, don't like a >> situation where we have to write and test things twice - with and >> without boost versions, single & multi-threaded etc. > I don't want to be in the business of subsidizing IT departments that > take away root then refuse to install recent and common software.
Kenneth, I completely sympathize with you. Unfortunately, there are places (such as where I work) where stability is important, and a major mechanism for achieving stability is the use of an enterprise-level Linux distro; such distros by design use older versions of most software. I have frequently found myself being the voice pushing for more recent software, and in fact we are (very slowly) transitioning to a more modern distro. But the point remains that there is value in being able to compile Moses on older distributions (like Centos 5.x) and newer platforms (like iOS and Android). I haven't been involved in the Moses coding surrounding multithreading and its use of Boost. While there is value in the ability to compile Moses on the platforms I mentioned above, Hieu's point is very valid - it would be much better from a testing and bug-prevention perspective to have fewer code paths to examine. It may even be that this factor is important enough to justify changes that would make it harder or impossible to compile on less used, older platforms. I guess my main point is that as decisions are made, keep in mind how those changes will affect users on older distribution, as well as development on newer platforms. I like your suggestion of using only Boost headers instead of Boost libraries for any mandatory Boost dependencies. As far as multi-threaded versus single-threaded, I am fine with removing the single-threaded option if that would make development and maintenance easier. (Now that I've said that, does multi-threading depend on Boost?) Cheers, Lane _______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
