On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 06:25, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 2020-05-23 12:56, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:
Hi,
Prompted by general feelings about Boost perceived lack of modernization and internal "bloat", and after an explicit survey on what users dislike about Boost [1], I decided to try and write a more or less fleshed out proposal for an epoch-based organization of Boost libraries. I've extensively tested and refined the proposal during discussions on Reddit and the Boost Slack channel, and I feel this is now ready for presentation at the mailing list:
https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/README.md
I hope the proposal can start a productive conversation. Looking forward to your feedback.
From the article:
if you were writing a new candidate Boost library with C++11 as its baseline, would you strive to use std components rather than their Boost counterparts, no matter how good the latter are? I would say you would.
I would not. As a user (either in-Boost or external) I would choose the library that is technically better. Boost.Regex is actually a very good example of such, as it is considerably faster than at least some popular std::regex implementations. There are other examples where Boost equivalents are technically better in one regard or another than the standard counterparts.
The Microsoft STL is now open source (I'm sure you've all heard about it), So in the case of Microsoft, it suffices to create a PR and upstream the better boost library. I believe (to know) for boost::regex this has already happened or is going to happen. Boost should adopt <charconv> from Microsoft. degski -- @systemdeg "We value your privacy, click here!" Sod off! - degski "Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist" - Kenneth E. Boulding "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward P. Abbey