Re: Boost vs Std library features

From: Dominique Devienne (ddevienne_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-11-30 09:07:39

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 11:03 PM Niall Douglas via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> There were still some big design mistakes in 11
>

Isn't that in part what the proposal(s) to break backward compatibility to
fix mistakes is/are about?
The recognition that mistakes will be made, and we can opt-in explicitly to
the fixes?

I can't comment on WG21's effectiveness or not. So this is maybe off-topic.
But wouldn't having editions of the language allow for more flexibility
regarding BC?

[1]:
https://thenewstack.io/bjarne-stroustrups-plan-for-bringing-safety-to-c/
[2]: https://vittorioromeo.info/index/blog/fixing_cpp_with_epochs.html