Re: [boost] Review: Lambda library - more technical analysis

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-25 19:10:10

At 02:12 PM 3/25/2002, David A. Greene wrote:

 >Asger Alstrup Nielsen wrote:
 >
 >> It is in fact a new programming language, because it is not
 >> possible to use the same keywords or syntax, and it is not possible
 >> to implement things exactly like you like, because of limitations
 >> in C++.
 >
 >As I understand it, a not-explicitly-stated goal of the Boost
 >process is to identify core language issues and provide concrete
 >examples of how those issues cause real problems.  With that in
 >mind, I don't really think it's fair to penalize a library because
 >it exposes weaknesses in the language.  I think that's a positive
 >outcome.

I agree with Dave.

Now that the C++ committee's enhancement working group is starting to look 
at future core language changes, we can (and already have) start feeding 
them issues that arise in library development.

But that's a long term proposition.  We shouldn't hold off accepting useful 
libraries because of potential future language changes.

--Beman