Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Phoenix review starts today, September 21st
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-29 09:19:07

David Abrahams wrote:
> on Sun Sep 28 2008, Joel de Guzman <> wrote:
>>> I think one difference here may be that Joel already knows he has
>>> interface-breaking changes planned (if that's not actually the case, I
>>> apologize). Several libraries have had interface-breaking changes after
>>> acceptance, but AFAIK these were not anticipated at the time of the
>>> review.
>> Yes, I do anticipate interface-breaking changes. The proto port (What
>> we call V3) is special because it actually captures a lot of what I
>> had in mind for the next revision. I also expect, as typical with
>> a review, more changes that I haven't foreseen. The suggested "optional-
>> laziness" and the new and improved switch_ syntax, are two such cases
>> of high consideration. I thought it would make sense to addess all
>> these in one step.
>> Again, let me reiterate, that despite all these changes, the design
>> and implementation or V2 is still sound, and IMO, pretty much up
>> to standards with Boost quality. It is still the solid basis for
>> V3 with up to 95% of the interface intact and essentially unchanged
>> design and structure.
> In case *I* wasn't sufficiently clear about it, let me try to be
> painfully explicit: we may want to discuss whether it's good for Boost
> or its users if we release a new top-level library and then break its
> interface in the next release, three months later. I'm all for
> accepting some version of Phoenix, but I want to make sure that users'
> needs for -- and the public perception of -- Boost's stability are
> accounted for.

Agreed 100%. I wouldn't want to have a release that will be good for
only a few months and break the interface in the next release.
That's the last thing I would want to do. I value stability.


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at