Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 19:23:35

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> No, I'm saying it's up to the maintainer to maintain their library. I
> believe that means making it able to use as much STL11 as possible if
> they want to keep it fresh and relevant. Or else they completely
> rewrite it in C++ 11/14. I don't mind which.
>

Are you saying that if a Boost library uses boost::function, it's up to
that library's author to make it able to use std::function instead?

I think that if the option is available at all it should be up to
boost::function to map to std::function, but other Boost libraries would
still #include "boost/function.hpp" and refer to it as boost::function.

-- 
Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode