-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gottlob Frege Sent: 27 November 2014 21:26 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] List of C++ 11 only Boost libraries and their status?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
I have to say I don't get the point of such a review.
Boost has never had a requirement that a library support anything other than the latest available C++ standard.
I'm not sure it has even had that - Are any compilers really fully compliant with any standard even now? Is any standard really that fully defined?
Would boost push C++11 better if its libraries were backwards compatible (so as to "ease" people into C++11) or should a library abandon old C++ and "force" users to move forward?
No - not gratuitously.
If I was to write a new library, that _could_ be old-C++ compatible, but with extra work, should I put in that extra work?
Only a little extra work. Sometimes it is trivial, when it would increase potential users to the many stuck with old compilers.
The further question, which I think should be discussed here or at BoostCon/C++Now, is what is Boost's role *today*? Is boost still a stepping stone to the standard? (I find that with the standard's new pace, and with its push to use TS's, "stepping stone" is now a more minor role for boost. For better or worse - ie I'm not sure if it is good for the standard.) Or is boost now a place for good libraries, most of which aren't general enough to be in std, but are really good and really useful when you need them? Or is boost a maintenance effort for old libraries for older compilers. (I don't think Boost is just that, but is it part of its role?)
FWIW, I think it is still both - but the balance may be shifting. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830