Re: [boost] Boost libraries after C++0x acceptance

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-08 17:18:08

Peter Dimov wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:
>
>> The library standard doesn't "work".  It can't.  It's not code.  The
>> standard doesn't include an implemenation.  And once we
>> have a reference implementation which can be compiled on a
>> language conformant compiler, what is gained from the work
>> required to add it to the standard?
>
> Wider audience,

perhaps.

Actually, I see this as the only real benefit.  Instead of "wider audience"
I would call it something like of "imprimateur of people who know
what they are doing".  That is, being accepted into the standard
make it "acceptable" to use.  Its sort of a "certification".  But
since it doesn't include implementation, the certification has to
be limited.  Of course I feel confident in making my own
decision as to whether a particular library is a good candidate
for use - but I don't work for a larger organization which may
really need this kind of thing.  Still its an awfully expensive
"seal of approval".

> multiple competing implementations, availability.

The existance of a the standard doesn't affect these.  Remember,
I'm presuming the existence of a free, conforming C++ implementation
of the library in question.

> You
> can depend on the standard library being available for use

Remember,
I'm presuming the existence of a free, conforming C++ implementation
of the library in question.

> even if for
> administrative/legal/whatever reasons no third party code is allowed
> on a project.

It was precisely the posting of a question regarding this which clarified 
the
question in my own mind.

The existence of a standard in no way effects the "third party"
status of any particular implmentation.

Note that all the compilers we currently use are shipping with "third party"
library implementions.  (hmm maybe g++ doesn't fit here - but then its
not even clear who the "first party" is here).  Of course,
this fact has to be kept a secret from the legal community.

Robert Ramey