Subject: Re: [boost] Microsoft vs The Boost License
From: Phil Bouchard (philippeb8_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-05 18:03:14
On 08/05/2017 12:57 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
>> 3) And now here I am with Microsoft trying to copy the idea behind
>> root_ptr's node_proxy:
>> With their "deferred_ptr heap":
> Herb's been banging a drum regarding alternative mechanisms for
> allocation cleanup in C++ for as long as I can remember. I believe that
> repo above was to demonstrate how easy it would be for C++ to
> standardise some GC implementation based on the above.
> I personally think he's wrong on standardised GC for C++, and so does
> almost everyone else I know. But Herb has more than earned respect for
> any opinion he takes on anything in my book.
> And I appreciate that you feel plagiarised. But standards folk almost
> never propose standardisation of their own inventions by definition. I
> wouldn't take it personally.
Thanks for your advice Niall, I appreciate.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk