From: Aaron W. LaFramboise (aaronrabiddog51_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-13 00:55:54
Carlo Wood wrote:
>>3. User programs compiled for platform A, and linking with
>> a shared versions of this library - do not need to be
>> able to run on platform B (with same architecture)
>> without recompilation.
>
> I don't see any benefit in allowing any kind of binary
> portability. Actually - I think that this is rather trivial
> issue as I think that most of boost already enforces this.
> It would restrict the design enormously and put unneccessary
> strain on the efficiency of the implementation to maintain
> an ABI interface for this library. Just added this topic
> to make this clear once and for all ;).
What do you mean by 'platform' and what do you mean by 'architecture'?
Is this non-guarantee different from the usual non-guarantee of
different compilers being binary incompatible?
Aaron W. LaFramboise