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

From: Richard Hadsell (hadsell_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-10 09:20:55

Phil Nash wrote:

>No, that wasn't my main point - it was just a supporting factor. And I
>wouldn't necessarily call them all "stupid". Some have good, if
>misplaced, reasons.
>My overall point was just, as others have said, to reach a much wider audience.
>  
>
My company (i.e., my boss) is VERY reluctant to rely on third-party 
software, which includes Boost libraries.  If Boost ceased to exist or 
support new compilers, we would be stuck with a major task of 
maintaining code, which we did not develop.  I'm not saying that this is 
likely to happen, and I have managed to convince everyone here that 
Boost is widely accepted and very professionally developed and 
maintained.  However, libraries that are part of a C++ standard give us 
a reliable guarantee that we can use them in code that will work on new 
platforms and compilers with no maintenance needed on our part.

It may be a lot of work on the part of Boost developers to get their 
libraries accepted as standard, but I very much appreciate their 
efforts.  I consider their acceptance as a major success.

-- 
Dick Hadsell			914-259-6320  Fax: [phone]
Reply-to:			hadsell_at_[hidden]
Blue Sky Studios                http://www.blueskystudios.com
44 South Broadway, White Plains, NY 10601