Subject: Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries
From: Michael Fawcett (michael.fawcett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-21 13:17:20
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> So what happens to the iterators library when it's time for the rewrite
> I've been planning? I intend, as much as possible, to maintain
> compatibility with the old interfaces, of course. Is that still a
> "stable" library?
Maybe put the new library in its own namespace and retain the old
version in its own namespace for a release or two with it being marked
deprecated in the documentation?
A macro could be provided that alternately brought the different
versions into the boost namespace. Of course it would bring the new
library into the boost namespace by default.
This may be too much of a burden on the library writer, and it's also
getting into specifics when I think the discussion is mostly about
processes at a high level, but I do think the idea has some merit.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk