Boost logo

Boost :

From: Janek Kozicki (janek.listy.mailowe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-27 14:32:22

Dominique Devienne via Boost said: (by the date of Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:04:50 +0100)

> Hi. I like that idea. I'm on C++17 and Boost 1.74, likely for a long time*,
> so a C++17 Boost fork would work better for me, but C++20's
> modules and concepts do seem like a stronger base for a Boost 2.0
> and would yield bigger bang for the buck, longer term.

I completely agree. Let the boost versions 1.74, 1.75, 1.76 etc
remain C++Old compliant, and can be maintained as long as one wishes
to maintain it. And start the 2.00, 2.01, 2.02 boost releases
versioning which takes a new breath by fully utilizing the new C++20 features.

No workarounds broken compilers is also a good idea.

# Janek Kozicki                    

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at