Subject: Re: [boost] Rebooting Boost: Call for Lightning Talks @ CppCon
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-22 20:12:26
On 22 May 2016 at 14:37, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> > "What design pattern, practice or idiom should a standards aspiring
> > collection of C++ 14/17 libraries share?"
> I don't see how this is related to Rebooting Boost.
> Could you elaborate?
The idea is that the fast paced delivery of reboot ideas provide food
for thought and discussion for when the real work begins at the
restaurant and the bar and during the days of the conference
thereafter. I can already foretell one of the most contentious
discussions will be on naming the new collection - someone already
suggested "Lift" by private email.
Original Boost started with beer. So should a reboot of Boost.
If this reboot is decided to happen, anyone willing to contribute is
welcome if they bring a positive attitude and a can-do mentality. If
the group decide to allow everyone to commit to everyone else's git
repos (probably likely), then it's a "just do it" kind of fun and
mutually engaging atmosphere. Like it was in the beginning back when
Boost was fun.
> Should the talks address whatever issue concerns Boost and how
> Boost would solve them?
Nope. Boost 1.x is no longer material nor relevant. It's legacy, and
not important to this reboot except as a source of good ideas and
possibly some of its more recent libraries. For example, why would
anyone want to bother metaprogramming by hand again if Hana is
guaranteed to be available in the reboot?
The reboot is a clean slate, a tabula rasa. Anything can happen,
whomever proposes and implements something gets to design it. If it
proves not up to task, it gets reimplemented. Like a startup. Like
Boost was at the beginning.
Questions such as whether one wants to maintain just enough
compatibility with Boost so libraries could coexist in both
collections are up to those who join the development of the reboot. I
personally would want this as I'd like my libraries to exist in both
collections, but I would be merely one voice amongst many equals, and
if I get voted down I don't mind.
All that matters is that the code eventually arrives at standards
quality, and the communal supporting infrastructure greatly reduces
barriers to entry over present Boost for both developers and end
users. How that is achieved and what forms it takes is up to the
developers implementing the reboot.
-- 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