Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeff Garland (azswdude_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 16:03:31

On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:48 AM Mike via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>

> But there are imho very reasonable reasons why people ask for a version
> of boost that makes use of c++XX beyond "because it is cool".

I can give you a very concrete one -- from_iso_string in date_time. It's
signature takes a const std::string&. If I have an std::string_view, then
I have to unnecessarily construct a string to call this function -- which
harms performance and is ugly. The bit of good news here is that it's easy
to change the signature for c++17 and up to just take string_view (that
covers string too) -- well after some code rewrite and by adding macro
hackery. But then the issue might be, should I support boost string_view
in older versions and add more macros so I'm not including extra stuff.
The combinatorics of supporting all the options can grow quickly.

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