Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc]
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-25 16:53:41
Nathan Ridge wrote:
>> Based on this I really have reservations that GSOC is really
>> useful to boost. Also, given Google's coding guidlines,
>> which explicitly proscribe most of boost and most of C++11,
>> I don't see how Google would find boost a match for them.
> That's interesting. I can understand C++11, being as it is relatively
> new, but do you know why Google's coding guidelines proscribe
> most of boost?
Look it up - they've explained their rationale on a point by point basis
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk