[boost] The future and present of Boost

Subject: [boost] The future and present of Boost
From: Mike Dev (mike.dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-22 08:53:09

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Robert Ramey via Boost
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 3:33 AM
> 
> 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.  

They would still have had to spend the time on standardizing ranges-v3.
I don't see how ranges-v3 being in boost instead of a stand-alone repo
would have made any difference for standardization, unless you assume 
that it would have produced a much superior design. 

Also, considering that the "actual" ranges library depends on 
concepts, I don't see how that work could have been done as part of a 
boost library which is commonly expected to work with a wide variety of
compilers / compiler versions.

> Compared to Boost, the C++ committee is an inferior organization to
> design and produce quality software.

  
Maybe I'm getting this wrong, but I don't see Boost designing or producing 
any software. I see some individuals producing and maintaining great 
libraries (certainly in part due to feedback from other boost members) 
that may or may not get accepted into boost. 

The one thing I can say however is that for standardizing libraries,
a production quality, cross-platform implementation (which may or may not be 
part of boost) is much more useful than a TS that doesn't get implemented by 
half of the toolchains. 

Best

Mike