Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [MPL lite or MPL 2] A modest proposal
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-06 13:30:41

On Friday 06 March 2015 10:13:01 Robert Ramey wrote:
> My proposal is a response to suggestions that we might address
> the mpl maintenance problem by eliminating support for older compilers
> and standards. In my opinion, the suggestion has merit in that writing mpl
> using C++11 features would result in something much easier to maintain
> and understand. Of course this would not be compatible with C++03 compilers.
> The only way to have it both ways is to leave the current MPL as it is
> and add a separately maintained "MPL Lite" or "MPL.core" or whatever
> which would be C++11+ only. For those who are concerned about the
> maintainability issue with the current MPL - and actually would be
> interested
> in doing something about it - I believe that this would be a good way
> forward.

I think the main question is if that's actually needed. The current MPL works
on all compilers, old and new ones. There are little to no maintenance
requests. And for new features we have several new candidate libraries, which
conveniently drop C++03 already. So dropping C++03 in MPL seems like losing
the key advantage (which is compatibility).

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at