Re: Boost Foundation, Boost, and the Beman Project

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-07-11 15:41:26

On 11/07/2024 16:29, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 10:13 AM Niall Douglas via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/07/2024 10:28, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>>
>>   > At the moment I'm not proposing anything yet; this is purely
>>   > informative. But no matter how I look at it, I see a pretty
>>   > fundamental difference of opinion, which we'll need to
>>   > deal with at some point.
>>
>> I think you're seeing the Beman Project as a Boost 2.0, or Boost
>> replacement.
>>
>> If one saw it instead as preparing the ground for reforming the shit
>> show which is WG21 library standardisation, then it would be complementary.
>>
>> Boost's very own founders had first had experience of the shit show
>> which is WG21 library standardisation. It could be argued that Dave left
>> C++ over it, and Beman holds the record for the longest and hardest
>> library standardisation process ever at WG21. I think Boost has - for
>> extremely good reasons given the evidence - stopped trying at WG21.
> 
> I had the opportunity to chat with one of the contributors to the
> first release of Boost libraries at the last WG21 meeting. And my
> impression of the rationale for the foundation of Boost now differs
> from what appears to be the popular understanding. Boost originally
> didn't specifically aim to be an avenue for libraries to be adopted
> into the C++ Standard. The aim was to collect and distribute quality
> libraries aimed at general C++ developers in a web site. Everything
> else was just happenstance.

It could indeed be very fairly argued that WG21 did, for a period, 
prefer to standardise from Boost. And then it stopped doing that.

My main recollection of early Boost was it was principally a collection 
of evil hacks and workarounds for C++ compilers being terrible. So a 
"C++ compiler portability layer" as it were.

After that came collections of useful algorithms etc, but TBH most shops 
had their own local algorithm libraries, so that part was less useful.

Then came the rise of "killer apps" for Boost, of which smart pointers, 
networking, parsing and Python integration were definite drivers as it 
was easier to use Boost's stuff than locally reinvent.

That gap has reopened since. My last two jobs have seen me 
reimplementing ASIO several times over now, as that's what the customer 
wants.

Niall