Subject: Re: Backward compatibility
From: Christian Henning (chhenning_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-07-04 13:46:27
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:14 AM Mateusz Loskot <mateusz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> We're shaking off the Grand Merge, releasing
> significant GIL update with Boost 1.68 and
> soon we will be able to move forward (towards GIL 3?).
Congrats on the big milestone!
> I've already started removing lots of dependencies
> from Boost itself, replacing them with C++11.
> The one more challenging is removal of Boost.TypeTraits
> and some bits of MPL .
> This experience made me wonder how we should approach
> significant changes in the API, structure of public headers, etc.
> for backward compatibility.
Priority wise I think we need to work on the API. We need to include boost
and other c++ experts. But in general, we need to answer the question what
we want from gil? Do we just want the core and the ability for extensions?
The core being sort of a STL for 2D data or do we want to include 3D?
I think we should stick with the concepts that gil already provides and
take that as a starting point.
There are ideas here: https://github.com/boostorg/gil/wiki/Boost.GIL-3-Ideas
I would advise against backward compatibility.
Boost list run by Boost-Gil-Owners