Subject: [boost] (Fwd) Re: Thoughts on Boost v2
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-21 12:16:52
Seeing as the original did not reach the mailing list.
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Wed, 21 May 2014 07:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Ramey <robertmacleranramey_at_[hidden]>
Copies to: boost_at_[hidden], boost_at_[hidden], s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Thoughts on Boost v2
On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 4:49:37 AM UTC-7, Niall Douglas wrote:
> > We welcome C++14 libraries and I see no problem with a submission on
> > that basis alone if it is supported by at least two compilers.
> For me personally, I would vote for an instant rejection for any
> library not compilable to the MSVC ABI irrespective of any other
a review is not a vote. Acceptance/Rejection is not a democratic
process. The review manager has the authority to accept/reject based
on his assessment of the quality of the library independent of the
of "votes" it receives.
Long standing boost policy is that there is no explicit requirement
any code conform to any specific compiler as long as it complies with
the current standard. There is no requirement that it use specific
features (e.g. from more recent standards) to the exclusion of more
traditional (albeit still conforming) features.
Indeed, a number of libraries have been submitted and accepted
that don't compile on multiple compilers.
------- End of forwarded message -------
-- 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