Subject: Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries
From: Tomas Puverle (Tomas.Puverle_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-03 15:53:42
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> This relates to another thread. Should libraries be marked as
> I like it, but I would prefer stable/new. Libraries that aren't new
> shouldn't be unstable, and rewrites would make the library "new" again.
Agreed completely. This would be very useful to have.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk