Re: [boost] Boost libraries after C++0x acceptance

From: loufoque (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-08 18:27:16

Edward Diener wrote:

> Now let's suppose that 3rd party library is added as a C++ standard 
> library. Immediately the compiler vendor which has the bugs or does not 
> support a C++ standard language feature needed by that library, and 
> wants to be compliant to the C++ standard library, needs to fix their 
> problem. This to me is a good thing.

I see no reason why the compiler vendor would choose to not support a 
feature, which prevents it from claiming conformance, but would choose 
to support a library which was just added to the standard in order to be 
compliant with it.