Subject: Re: [boost] transforming ex. boost lib into C++11-only lib?
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-22 11:05:14
On 22 Jan 2015 at 15:20, Oliver Kowalke wrote:
> is it permitted to transform an existing boost library into a C++11-only
If you meant here "transform an existing boost library into a
C++11-only *Boost* library with C++ 11 only APIs" then I think you
need to cycle the library name. Precedent here is that Signals went
to Signals2, here I should think Coroutine ought to become
If you meant here "transform an existing boost library into a C++11
STL _capable_ *standalone* library" i.e. you do as Chris did in ASIO
and I've done in AFIO via BindLib and provide a macro based framework
for swapping out Boost STL for C++ 11 STL, then no I don't think the
name needs to change as ASIO already did this some time ago, and I
doubt anyone in Boost even noticed. The precedent here says this is
okay so long as 03 Boost STL support still works.
If finally you really meant here "I'd like a totally different
internal implementation of Coroutine when C++ 11 mode is switched on,
but still provide a legacy if orphaned but mostly API compatible C++
03 implementation" then I'd personally say no name change needed.
Precedent here is probably Boost.Thread where an increasing chunk of
it uses different implementations depending on the C++ standard being
-- 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