| Re: [AD] 4.2.0 release failed build on VC 2005 |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] 4.2.0 release failed build on VC 2005
- From: Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:00:13 -0800
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=fB4qT3UL2z9zVUnFOld1lGVShS2e4ZmGmq2r7hjDmUFQLUdp7TnP5cmMLjlcPrbf3E3/JymET0kGRDsI9yY2pK9DfNpEqCutr5fkhgg6zbh4h97NiKB2hcAJVD2HDtIYX7lEnA96lqw26QtENN2qTEnNgZbtHp4UWT9oro3C/2g=
On Saturday 31 December 2005 00:40, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> I agree, but it's also widely used. And as Thomas F said, none of the MSVC
> versions supports C99 properly, so what does dropping MSVC6 buy us in that
> case?
The ability to never have to utter the phrase "But it won't work in MSVC6."
Same with GCC 3.2 and earlier. It's a free upgrade to GCC 3.3+ and VC7+.