From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-09 21:51:52
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:54:42 -0700, Jonathan Turkanis wrote
> David Abrahams wrote:
> >> If I have to choose, then, I would much rather use the namespace io
> >> and move the library back to boost/io than use the namespace
> >> iostreams.
> > You don't _have_ to choose, but then you could do better than the
> > status quo.
> Okay, I'll hold off adding iostreams to CVS while I think about it
> some more.
Sorry, still catching up on holiday email. Did a decision get made on this
yet? Because I'd really hate to see the last conclusion: 'holding off on
adding iostreams'. Since 1.32 is slowly fading into the sunset we have
several new libraries that should be in 1.33 -- and the best way to avoid the
long release cycle is to add those libraries early and get the regression
testing cranked up before everyone is begging for the release to be cut...
So I'd like to see a decision and see the library added soon. Besides, it
will make it easier for me to use :-)
ps: My analysis says the libraries accepted but not added list is as follows:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk