Re: [boost] Re: C++ committee Library TR progress in Santa Cruz

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-01 15:04:22

At 06:36 PM 10/31/2002, David B. Held wrote:

 >Douglas Gregor wrote:
 >
 >> On Thursday 31 October 2002 02:31 pm, James Curran/MVP wrote:
 >>
 >> [...]
 >> >    I assume that this now means that these classes should be defined
 >> > in the std:: namespace.  What effect does that have on Boost? Should
 >> > their reference versions here be moved into std:: or kept in
 >> > boost::?  If we move them to std::, must they be frozen to exactly
 >> > match what's in the TR, or it further development possible on them?
 >> [...]
 >
 >Just out of curiosity, is it realistic to believe any vendor will supply
 >a different implementation than the Boost version?

My guess is that several vendors will do their own implementations of most 
of the TR. If nothing else that is more fun than maintaining someone else's 
code. Plus it gives them a chance to try to add value, such as via 
optimizations.

--Beman