[SciPy-Dev] Bundling Boost?

josef.pktd@gmai... josef.pktd@gmai...
Sun Oct 7 20:31:12 CDT 2012

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Pauli Virtanen <pav@iki.fi> wrote:
>> I'm not 100 % certain about the compiler support. Perhaps C++ is already
>> mature enough to work across the platforms we care about.
> It's worth having a good test of the compiler situation first.  I have
> horrible memories a few years ago (not that long, though) of trying to
> use the Boost Graph Library for a project with python wrappers, and
> the Boost version this used wouldn't even compile with the newest gcc
> of the current ubuntu at the time.  My only solution was to build gcc
> itself from source.
> So before we end up foisting upon RedHat users or similar the
> requirement that to build scipy they need to rebuild their compilers
> from source, which I suspect wouldn't be a very popular move, let's
> find out what is the oldest version of gcc this particular part of
> boost will require.
> Boost is great, but it's also famous for pushing compilers very, very
> far beyond their comfort zone.  So this step should not be taken
> lightly.  It would also be good to know:
> - does it compile with MS compilers? If so, what's the oldest version
> that works?

the boost doc page that Ralf linked to has Visual Studio 2003 and 2005
as example case for compilers and IDEs


> - and what about the Intel ones?
> Not trying to rain on the parade, but over the last 10 years I've
> tried to use boost a few times, and every occasion has led to compiler
> pain.  So I'd be cautious with putting it in as a scipy dependency.
> If it turns out that this part of Boost is less sensitive to compiler
> details, then great!  I'd love to be proven wrong in my paranoia
> here...
> Cheers,
> f
> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
> SciPy-Dev@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev

More information about the SciPy-Dev mailing list