Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] question about C++11 guidelines
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-05 08:08:45

on Fri May 04 2012, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <> wrote:

> Le 04/05/12 10:18, John Maddock a écrit :
>>> IMO, every Boost library that has a counterpart in the standard
>>> should comply with the standard as much as possible and should use
>>> the standard whenever it is possible (that is the class/function is
>>> available and the library don't introduce extensions on them). Any
>>> deviation from the standard could be seen as a defect and should
>>> either be fixed or described explicitly as a limitation on the
>>> documentation.
>> If we do that then those libraries will wither and die, Boost
>> authors should be able to continue to enhance and expand capability,
>> possibly with a view towards the *next* standard. Besides just
>> because the standard reflects best practice right now, that doesn't
>> mean that future tricks won't come along that improve things
>> further.
> I don't see how my point of view disable to enhance the capacity of
> the library. Replace if you want "describe explicitly as a limitation"
> by "describe explicitly the differences.

I think it comes down to a difference in interpretation of "any
deviation." IIUC, you meant to allow pure extensions, but John didn't
read it that way.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at