Re: [boost] Foundational vs non-foundational libraries (was: Re:Thoughts on Boost v2)

Subject: Re: [boost] Foundational vs non-foundational libraries (was: Re:Thoughts on Boost v2)
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-21 09:05:04

Niall Douglas wrote:

> On 21 May 2014 at 15:45, Peter Dimov wrote:
> > I don't understand. Who are those hypothetical people holding back 
> > interesting new development?
>
> Start reading at:
>
> http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/c-11-td4648532.html

That was a year ago, and it's just words. If I decide to write a new 
C++11-only library, archived messages in a year-old mailing list thread will 
not stop me.

But, you'll say, the library will not pass review due to being C++11. Will 
it not? On what do we base this prediction?