[boost] Re: TR2 and C++0x heads up

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-23 18:25:04

Jeff Garland wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:32:22 +0200, Thorsten Ottosen wrote
> 
>>"Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>news:6.0.3.0.2.20050422110501.042b2a20_at_mailhost.esva.net...
>>
>>| So far there are plans to propose Boost.Threads, Boost.Filesystem, 
>>and | Boost.Signals. As well as proposals for some of the more major 
>>libraries, I | personally hope someone will do a sweep through Boost 
>>looking at some of | the smaller utilities and helpers for a 
>>possible "Small Additions" | proposal.
>>
>>I believe Alisdair was considering to work on boost.format.
>>
>>Besides, boost.date_time I think these other libs are good 
>>candidates (maybe with slight modifications):
>>
>>1. conversion
>>2. optional
>>3. string algorithms
>>4. utility
> 
> 
> Agree on these.
> 
> 
>>5. variant
> 
> 
> Is variant used widely enough to spend the time to standardize?
> 
> 
>>6. iostreams
> 
> 
> Agree on this too.
> 
> Should we be considering some of the new collection types: circular_buffer,
> mutli_array, multi_index, ptr_containers?  Or are the uses too esoteric for
> standarization?  What about serialization -- it's a big library, but really
> important.

I heavily agree on this last remark. Mr. Ramey has done a fantastic job 
with serialization, even with some really broken compilers, and it works 
very well with largely conforming C++ compilers. C++ really needs a 
standard serialization library, especially because IMO serialization is 
an absolute necessity of C++ RAD programming environments, and I hope to 
see many more C++ IDE's supporting RAD programming in the future once 
all the pieces are in place for doing it purely with standard C++.