Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-24 16:42:29
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Hartmut Kaiser
> <hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> Personally, if boost local was accepted I would expect to use it for
> >> a year or so, until I could assume people I work with all had decent
> >> C++11 compilers, and then drop it for lambdas. I'm never going to
> >> start using boost::phoenix in code I share with other people.
> > Great, do that. Boost.Local has not to be in Boost in order for this
> > plan to succeed.
> This statement can be interpreted in many ways some of which are not fair
> at all to a library under review and never mentioned on the Boost review
> process... for a library not to be accepted so a user's "plan"
> of using Boost in some "way" will not "succeed". Which admission criteria
> is this...
I said during my review that IMHO Boost.Local does not belong into Boost.
Nevertheless, it may be of value for others which you could ensure by
maintaining the library outside of Boost.
> Can you please clarify your statement? Which "plan" is not to succeed by
> preventing Boost.Local from being accepted?
I was referring to the 'plan' of the OP to use Boost.Local for a year or so
and to switch to C++11 lambdas afterwards.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk