Subject: Re: [boost] Thoughts on Boost v2
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-21 07:07:10
On 17 May 2014 at 11:09, John Maddock wrote:
> > 1. Minimum required compiler feature set will be VS2014's. No use of
> > Boost STL permitted where the C++ 11 STL provides a feature.
> Sigh. So workarounds, even totally trivial ones are banned?
> I don't see that as a good balance.
The workarounds for just VS2014 alone will be significant. Lack of
constexpr on member functions is a real problem.
> > 2. cmake instead of Boost.Build.
> Another sigh.
> We've had one very large transition (SVN to git) in the last year that
> has already delayed the next release by many months. I would be
> strongly against another large transition anytime soon. I have nothing
> in particular for or against CMake - though I can certainly see the
> attraction of an externally-supported build tool.
Remember I'm proposing to begin from scratch with an all-C++11/14 set
of libraries. Only bits of utility would get ported over using a
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk