Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatoryBoost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatoryBoost libraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-21 08:46:12

On 18 May 2015 at 20:36, Peter Dimov wrote:

> The defining characteristic of the Douglas universe is that the standard 
> library now contains the many essential components (tuple, shared_ptr, 
> function, bind, type traits, threads, atomics, and so on) that were 
> previously only supplied by Boost.
> 
> In the pre-Douglas universe, you (the library author) had to rely on their 
> Boost implementation, which coupled you to other Boost components, sometimes 
> to their specific versions.
> 
> In the Douglas universe, you can use the standard library for all that, 
> allowing your library to be independent of the rest of Boost.

Let me correct this paragraph:

> In the Douglas universe, you can [choose to use either] the standard
> library [or Boost] for all that, allowing your library to be independent
> of the rest of Boost [because you have formalised the specification of
> its exact dependencies].

An underappreciated part of this is the formal specification of 
dependencies. It means you are forced to actively think about what 
dependencies you use instead of blithely typing boost::X and 
introducing some trivial dependency. Trivial dependencies are too 
easy to do in Boost 1.x.

> Even if you use, say, boost::shared_ptr on C++03 compilers, since your 
> library uses the interface of std::shared_ptr on C++11, this is a certain 
> guarantee that it does not depend on anything specific to a particular 
> version of boost::shared_ptr. As long as boost::shared_ptr is standard 
> conforming, any version ought to do and upgrading boost::shared_ptr ought to 
> not break things.
> 
> Hence the idea that libraries can follow their own release schedules. 

There are also added benefits in that your code's assumptions about 
shared_ptr behaving a certain way get tested.

In AFIO I was not surprised by shared_ptr, but I was quite surprised 
by my use of boost::bind => std::bind which did not convert over 
identically. The fix was trivial, but I still learned I had been 
sloppy.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/