Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] non-interface-related concerns
From: Bjorn Reese (breese_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-28 13:12:43
On 05/28/2017 02:10 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
> If Outcome is accepted in std-flavoured form, I already intend to delete
> the namespace bindings code entirely. They have only hung around due to
> this upcoming review.
In that case, what is left of "boost-lite"?
Furthermore, can you describe what you mean by "std-flavoured form"?
Does it mean that Outcome is hardwired to <system_error>, without
support for Boost.System? Are there more differences?
> There is no "taint" from the boost-lite submodule. It can be included
> into any translation unit without ill effect. It is a good neighbour to
> all other C++, including different versions of itself.
"boost-lite" is not reviewed by Boost, and therefore not suitable for
use in a Boost library, whether as submodule or something else. That is
why I am suggesting an alternative.
> You may find a reply to Robert sent recently with a description of one
> post-approval Boost integration strategy I might take (use boost-lite
> submodule if checked out, else fall back onto hard Boost dependency).
You may not get approval until this is resolved.