From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-12 18:11:17
>> The C++ committee accepted what is essentially Boost.System
>> for C++0x.
>> See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2241.html
>> for the final proposal.
>> That proposal is now reflected in the working paper for the
>> new standard. See
>> The committee made some minor last minute changes. Those
>> changes are not yet reflected in Boost.System. The plan is to
>> bring Boost.System into compliance with the standard sometime
>> in the next month or so.
> Nice - but I don't know why posix errors are enumerated now.
The LWG wanted them to be usable as constants.
> Maybe some
> posix errors are missing (I'm not sure).
Please do an independent check. I have missed something. The POSIX folks
suggested adding a couple of new errors POSIX is in process of adding,
by the way.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk