Boost logo

Boost :

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-12-02 10:25:59

On 12/2/20 1:17 AM, Kostas Savvidis via Boost wrote:
>> On Dec 2, 2020, at 00:01, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> OTOH if he is compiling with C++11 on up he is probably using std::random instead of boost::random so your choice is right.
> I am providing my new, better RNG in boost::random since convincing LWG to include it in std::random will take some while longer ;)
> (btw, std:array is not a part of any interfaces of boost::random it is a purely an internal issue which, yes, I know, is not considered as serious)

Perhaps not in the particular case of array, but having user-selectable
std or boost components as class members is even more serious than in
interface (e.g. function arguments). Class member types do not get
reflected in the symbol names, which makes ABI discrepancies go
unnoticed by the linker and cause weird bugs in runtime. This is why
compile time selection between types of internal components is generally

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