Re: [epochs] Internal relevance in post-C++03 Boost of Boost03 components vs. standard equivalents

From: Jeff Garland (azswdude_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-06-04 14:53:13

The link is broken -- the .MD is not capitalized.

https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/boost_vs_std_internal.md

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 2:02 PM Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> For those of you who are following the discussion on epochs, I've just
> prepared a report
> on the relevance of "legacy" components intra-Boost for these Boost libs
> that require
> C++11 (or higher) to work:
>
>
> https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/boost_vs_std_internal.MD
>
> Quoting from the report:
>
> "It can be seen that (direct) usage of Boost03 components is residual
> (and in some cases
> due to backwards compatibility rather than for their functionality). We
> can draw then the
> conclusion that newer Boost libraries are already dismissing legacy
> dependencies when
> the standard environment offers alternatives."
>
> Best,
>
> Joaquín M López Muñoz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>