Subject: Re: [boost] The future and present of Boost
From: Raffi Enficiaud (raffi.enficiaud_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-23 21:49:41
On 22.10.18 16:28, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 10/22/18 4:20 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
>> On 10/22/18 11:53 AM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
>> Existing practice is important for standardization. Generally, being
>> part of a well-known and widely adopted project like Boost offers more
>> opportunity for adoption to a new library than it being separate.
> Also it allows for evolution.Â Standardization does not.
There is deprecation in the standard if I am not mistaken. Removal is
also up to compiler vendors as we saw not so long ago with VS2017.
There is a bit a deprecation in boost, barely removal.
If we want higher velocity in boost with the same energy/effort, we
should reduce the mass. It is as simple as that.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk