Boost logo

Boost :

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-14 17:59:10

As I suspected. I think this does mean we need to worry about overlap &
duplication. At the very least this possibility needs to be documented.

I don't think this means we should reject the library now, but we need to
caution that it is very likely to change?

Perhaps the C99 will be in the next MS release? Do I hear muttering about 8?


Paul A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB UK
+44 1539 561830 Mobile +44 7714 33 02 04

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Beman Dawes
| Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 5:34 PM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: RE: [boost] Numeric Conversion Formal Review
| At 05:41 PM 12/13/2003, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
| >I only worry about the implications of C99 functions being included in
| the
| >C++ Standard library (as seems very likely). This will provide some
| useful,
| >but potentially overlapping functions. Do we need to worry about this?
| >If it is now know to be accepted, it needs at least to be referenced.
| FWIW, most of the new C99 functions will almost certainly be in the C++
| Library Technical Report. They've already been approved in principle, with
| no dissenting votes, and Bill Plauger has volunteered to write the
| standardese.
| --Beman
| _______________________________________________
| Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at