Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-15 11:41:19

On 15 May 2015 at 6:28, Vladimir Prus wrote:

> > APIBind is merely a time saving layer which does some stuff for you.
> > You can do it manually, of course, like ASIO.
> Well, other parts of your post suggest that perfectly useful libraries
> will be 'deprecated' or something unless they are somehow migrated
> to this new world. Did I misunderstand?

My statement is equivalent to this: libraries not maintained (with
complete C++ 11/14 support) will stop being used over a finite time.

> > The authors of the libraries I reviewed appear very favourable to
> > adopting APIBind as it saves them hassle, especially with supporting
> > Boost.Test without the Boost.Test dependency. The Boost.Config
> > emulation is handy too.
> That might be good, but it does not explain how this tables supports your
> proposal for Boost 2.0? You've hand-picked a few libraries, ignoring
> half of libraries in review queue and created a table that shows no
> real convergence on anything. It hardly supports your proposal.

There is a ton of convergence in the C++ 11/14 libraries. Strikingly
so. And away from the 03 libraries.

I didn't examine the 03 libraries because they must adhere to Boost
1.x design requirements implicitly, and therefore have their hands
tied in 03.

> Now, the proposal *might* be good, it's just your statistics seems
> not a good argument for it.

Lack of data points so far. This time next year the future should be
clearer to more people.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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