Re: [boost] The Lonely Song of the MPL Maintainer -- or Boost support for antediluvian compiler and the future supprot of C++11

Subject: Re: [boost] The Lonely Song of the MPL Maintainer -- or Boost support for antediluvian compiler and the future supprot of C++11
From: Steven Maitlall (m.steven_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-30 09:29:30

Rather than expect any library owner/maintainer to manage development of a
C++11 and maintain the v1 library, it might be best to assign a new person
to maintain the v1 library, at least for as long as v2 development takes.

On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Hartmut Kaiser <hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> > This is meant to be a serious thread and not some trollfest about w/e
> > compilers.
> >
> > I am currently fixing bugs and applying feature request in MPL and it
> just
> > happens I spend more time deciphering the web of compatibility #ifdefs
> > than doing actual code. A rough guestimate tells me that on a
> > 100 lines MPL files, 80 of them are #ifdef for compatibility.
> >
> > It could fine and dandy if those #ifdefs where not, for a majority,
> > targeted at compiler i didnt even knew hwere standard conformant (ICC 5,
> > really) or still in serious use (Borland whatever). Some other are more
> > debatable (like MSVC 6 or such).
> >
> > Considering such compilers are so broken that upgrading boost is out of
> > question for these users and that C++11 and its new set of supporting
> > compilers are around the corner, also taking into account my limited
> > amount of sanity (IRC people can testify on this), can't we start some
> > support clean up in this library ?
> >
> > <radical>
> > Going further, shouldn't we start thinking at boost 2.0 which will
> > definitevely let c++03 die its peaceful death and start, on a voluntary
> > effort, move boost component toward C++11. I know we have a fully working
> > Fusion for 0x only. mpl, proto and other strategic infrastructure
> > libraries should benefit from that. Some are a trivial port like Boost.PP
> > and all the TR1 boost library that will just either disappear or forward
> > the C++11 version.
> > </radical>
> >
> > Here is the status of the thingy. Letting Boost 2.0 aside, what should be
> > the status of MPL and its sharazadian list of supported compiler ?
>
> I fully support the motion to get started with Boost V2, which should be to
> C++11 what Boost was originally to C++98. Today we know that the
> infrastructure libraries are needed most, so why not leave the existing MPL
> alone and start over? We already have the C++11 version of Fusion and given
> the fact, that MPL is mostly a clean subset of Fusion anyways we should
> have
> a head start already.
>
> Regards Hartmut
> ---------------
> http://boost-spirit.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>