+1
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 10:21 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] discontinue supporting of the MSVC 7.0
In light of that info,
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Adams [mailto:
In light of that info,
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:37 AM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] discontinue supporting of the MSVC 7.0
>
> Our experience with our custome
Sebor
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:39 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] discontinue supporting of the MSVC 7.0
Farid Zaripov wrote:
For now we are supporting four versions of the MSVC starting from
7.0.
The MSVC 7.0 doesn't supports the modern C++ features and I propo
Farid Zaripov-2 wrote:
>
> For now we are supporting four versions of the MSVC starting from 7.0.
> The MSVC 7.0 doesn't supports the modern C++ features and I propose
> to discontinue supporting of this compiler in stdcxx 4.3 version.
>
> Everyone is encouraged to vote, including non-com
Martin Sebor wrote:
I'll be at C++ committee meeting in Bellevue which happens to be hosted
by Microsoft the last week of February so I might drop in for a bit. Is
there a link with more details? (I know there were at least two emails
announcing it but they're most likely sitting on my hard driv
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Martin Sebor wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
With MS awakening to the significance of free compilers on every
real operating system, they've blinked, and made that headache
dissolve for us.
Now if they would only awaken to the importance of standards like
C99 an
Martin Sebor wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
With MS awakening to the significance of free compilers on every
real operating system, they've blinked, and made that headache
dissolve for us.
Now if they would only awaken to the importance of standards like
C99 and POSIX they would make an ev
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Tim Adams wrote:
Our experience with our customer base indicates that MSVC 7.0 was
abandoned quickly in favor of 7.1.
FWIW - that same generation, VS.NET's C++.NET implementation model
was completely abandoned and restructured in VS.2005 (a massively
better syntax
Tim Adams wrote:
Our experience with our customer base indicates that MSVC 7.0 was
abandoned quickly in favor of 7.1.
FWIW - that same generation, VS.NET's C++.NET implementation model
was completely abandoned and restructured in VS.2005 (a massively
better syntax, IMHO). Seems quite a few u
Martin Sebor wrote:
Farid Zaripov wrote:
For now we are supporting four versions of the MSVC starting from 7.0.
The MSVC 7.0 doesn't supports the modern C++ features and I propose
to discontinue supporting of this compiler in stdcxx 4.3 version.
Everyone is encouraged to vote, including non-
AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] discontinue supporting of the MSVC 7.0
Farid Zaripov wrote:
> For now we are supporting four versions of the MSVC starting from
7.0.
> The MSVC 7.0 doesn't supports the modern C++ features and I propose to
> discontinue supporting of
Farid Zaripov wrote:
For now we are supporting four versions of the MSVC starting from 7.0.
The MSVC 7.0 doesn't supports the modern C++ features and I propose
to discontinue supporting of this compiler in stdcxx 4.3 version.
Everyone is encouraged to vote, including non-committers.
Thi
12 matches
Mail list logo
