Re: [boost] Use of boost in safety critical work

Subject: Re: [boost] Use of boost in safety critical work
From: Stephen Kelly (hello_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-06 08:19:31

Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>> It stands for Software of Unknown Pedigree. They classify boost as SOUP.
> 
> I think this is plain wrong.

If they have not investigated the pedigree of Boost, then of course it is 
SOUP to them. I don't see how that could possibly be wrong.

> 
> Boost Libraries are all
> 
> 1  Peer reviewed.

The initial submission is peer reviewed. After that there is no pre-commit 
review requirement (I said "requirement") in Boost. The submitter/maintainer 
then owns all decisions related to the library. Many boost libraries have no 
maintainer or no active maintainer, and upkeep struggles to actually get 
done. Am I wrong?

> 2...7

I doubt any of that matters. 

I found this an interesting read this week:

 https://esrlabs.com/blog/estl-for-embedded-developers/

Thanks,

Steve.