Re: Boost.Compat

From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-04-29 23:46:47

On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 7:24 PM Peter Dimov wrote:

> Andrey Semashev wrote:
> > And lastly. I realize that the proposed Boost.Compat is supposed to
> contain
> > direct equivalents of the standard components. But what if we want to
> > improve on that? Would this be not allowed simply because this would
> deviate
> > from the standard?
>
> No, it wouldn't be allowed. Improving upon the standard makes it impossible
> to later replace the compatibility header with a using declaration. We have
> such a problem today with e.g. Boost.Ratio and Boost.Chrono, where because
> of extensions we can't simply make them be <ratio> and <chrono>.
>
> It's fine to want to improve upon the standard, but Compat will not be the
> place for that. That's what dedicated libraries are for.
>

I agree. If Boost.Compat exists then its components should not deviate from
their standard counterparts. It's not the place to innovate, only to
provide an implementation (if possible) for a standard library facility.