Closed lembacon closed 5 years ago
Not necessary. You can build hfst-ospell without any XML library support using --without-libxmlpp --without-tinyxml2
, in which case it falls back to bare minimum string parsing of the required fields.
Bitrot is a very real reason to always use newest available version. If it suddenly stops building with a newer standard, the code must be fixed for when that standard becomes default. It keeps the code maximally portable.
Also, newer distros use newer C++ standards throughout their packages, which affects the ABI. If hfst-ospell can't build with newer standards, it can't be used as a library against newer ABIs.
Bitrot, ABI issues, deprecations, and more, get caught this way. It yields better code in the long run. All projects should test against multiple configurations.
Are you serious? Bitrot is the exact reason hfstospell can't be even built with standards-compliant compiler without patching build rules or disabling functionality.
I'd also like to see any sources for the idea that ABI would change for same compiler between language versions.
hfst-ospell
currently requireslibxml++2
,libxml++2
usesstd::auto_ptr
which was deprecated since C++11 and has been removed as of C++17.