Re: Technical Excellence?

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-03-27 17:16:50

On 27/03/2024 17:07, Daniela Engert via Boost wrote:

> As a long-term user, contributor, and maintainer of our in-house flavour 
> of Boost, I want to share *my* point of view to answer your question. In 
> my opinion, Boost is lacking a vision (the original one doesn't seem to 
> be alive anymore).
> 
> Is Boost
>  Â - a framework? This means Boost.x uses facilities from Boost.y even 
> when there is a viable alternative in the standard library (or a 
> non-Boost library with the same API), but rather insists on the Boost.y 
> dependency.
>  Â - a polyfill? This means Boost.x strives to depend on standard library 
> facilities as much as possible - at least as configuration option.
>  Â - a loose collection of libraries that share a common moniker? This 
> means that every library developer does what they see fit according to 
> their assessment of the state of the ecosystem.
>  Â - a showcase of avantgarde, high-quality C++ building blocks that 
> every developer is proud to use, and can look at to learn about good C++ 
> for their own advancement?

Can't it be all four simultaneously?

There are plenty of libraries in Boost which were state of the art and 
cool when introduced, but look stale and tired from today's perspective. 
And that's a good thing, it means we're improving and getting better.

Niall