Subject: Re: [boost] The future and present of Boost
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-22 01:33:08
On 10/21/18 3:54 PM, Robert Jones via Boost wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2018 at 22:09, Robert Ramey via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
>> Hmmm - where is it? I'm aware of Boost Ranges but not of any other
>> library which implements a similar facility.
>> Eric Niebler's range-v3 library, https://github.com/ericniebler/range-v3
> I'm not intimately
> familiar with it, but I believe it's all Boost::Range V2 and then some.
Actually this is exactly what I was referring to with my point b) above.
Eric is a highly respected Boost Developer (Boost.Xpressive,
Boost.quickbook, and otherstuff etc.) After C++11 he got an opportunity
to develop ranges under the auspices of the C++ standard committee.
Many of us were disappointed that he didn't choose to do it under Boost.
But of course it's his choice.
But now Ranges may come as part of the standard in C++20. And then
sometime after may be available when/if compiler vendors choose to
implement their own version. All in all, the committed would have been
able to spend time on other stuff which only they can do. And Boost
would have had an modern ranges library years ago. Also Boost might
have had a useful library based concepts system. Only now do we have a
modern replacement for mpl - this would have happened years earlier.
Compared to Boost, the C++ committee is an inferior organization to
design and produce quality software. It's not that they don't have
smart people, it's that the C++ committee structure is setup to define
and approve standards - which is not the same as designing software.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk