Subject: Re: [boost] Boost 2.x - (Was Re: Boost is supposed to serve *the entire C++ community; it isn't Boost's goal to serve Boost's community*)
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-22 16:16:34
Le 22/05/2016 à 21:19, Edward Diener a écrit :
> On 5/22/2016 2:28 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
>> Le 21/05/2016 à 18:09, Edward Diener a écrit :
>>> On 5/21/2016 11:52 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
>>>> Wether we want a "C++14 only" Boost version is another thing.
>>> What could it possibly achieve to have a Boost with only C++11 or
>>> above libraries or a Boost with only C++14 or above libraries, as
>>> opposed to having Boost as we have it now in which each library can
>>> choose what level of C++ support it requires ? I would really like to
>>> get a technical answer, as opposed to an emotional response about
>>> "moving forward" and "looking to the future" and "serving the entire
>>> C++ community", to that question by those who propose such ideas.
>> I repeat myself : whether we want to do it is another question.
>> Is it worth doing it? I don't know. It needs a lot of resources and
>> What we as a Boost community could lost having additionally these new
>> Boost versions?
> Many of these are reasonable wishes. But I do not see what having a
> Boost version which supports only C++14 on up compilation has to do
> with any of them. Care to explain what facilities in C++14 on up is
> going to make any of your wishes happen ?
All of them.
Are you requesting me you enumerate the C++11/C++14 new features?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk