Subject: Re: [boost] Foundational vs non-foundational libraries (was: Re: Thoughts on Boost v2)
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-21 08:49:09
On 21 May 2014 at 15:45, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > Those who want Boost to provide a bridge between C++03 and C++11 because
> > they can't use C+11 should stick to "Legacy Boost" (whether that's v1.x or
> > some fork that goes into maintenance mode) and not hold back interesting
> > new development.
> I don't understand. Who are those hypothetical people holding back
> interesting new development?
Start reading at:
-- 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