Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 20:33:32
On 14 May 2015 at 19:27, Edward Diener wrote:
> If C++11/C++14 does not offer anything to a library developer of an
> existing library than what they already have with C++03 and Boost, what
> is the impetus to add C++11/C++14 support to a library ?
I gave four reasons earlier in the thread.
> I'll try again, even not knowing what you mean by "STL11 equivalents". Why
> would libraries in Boost which depend on STL11 equivalents not be able to
> use the STL11 equivalent ?
Slight API differences. Legacy API usage. Most STL11 implementations
are much less forgiving than Boost with usage.
Most of it is very small stuff, but requires human intervention to
fix. I certainly found a small truck load of minor breakages in AFIO
due to poor understanding of the STL. I learned a lot actually. My
code rigour improved enormously.
-- 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