[boost] Re: Boost 2 - development in long term

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-11 07:25:07

"Pavel Vozenilek" <pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Who will benefit of this all:
>   - library writers who do not want to support old
>     systems (less pressure on them) may spend more time
>     with design. This gets more important if more
>     powerfull/complex libraries will emerge.

All this for less pressure on a few authors?  These authors may simply
refuse to support older compilers today.  

>   - users with new compilers (they can be more sure
>     the library remains maintainable and may even be able
>     to understand its inner, too). Their existing code
>     using Boost should compile without changes.

That sounds like a break-even to me.

>   - compiler vendors will be able catch more errors.

How?

>   - standard comittee may be more interested in clean
>     code.

I doubt it.  Historically, the committee isn't particularly interested
in our implementations, only in our interfaces.

>   - if/when the world moves to C++0x it will be easier
>     to move Boost there (this is beyond horizont of this
>     idea though).

How so?

Sorry, but I just don't see what problem this is solving.  The
proposal is a huge undertaking, today or next year, and I don't see
any benefits that would make it worth the trouble.  Furthermore,
compilers will always be broken and require workarounds here and
there; you won't be able to keep them from creeping in, and I don't
think it's desirable to.  Part of the point of Boost is to have code
that's usable in the real world.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com