On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Bruce Adams <tortoise_74@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: ...
The status of boost for gcc4.7 is unclear (I know it has not been officially released yet but the status for gcc 4.6.2 is also unclear).
Both of the following links from www.boost.org are several years and versions out of date
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_34_0/status/compiler_status.html
Those links are years and years out of date. You should be looking at the daily regression tests. See http://beta.boost.org/development/testing.html In particular, http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary.html http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/summary.html ...
Surprisingly another thing that is unclear is the exact set of boost libraries that were included in C++11.
All of TR1 except special math functions went into C++11. Some other new C++11 library features, like enable_if, were based at least vaguely on boost libraries. Use of boost libraries has become an accepted practice, and it is now widely known that many libraries from boost are on a track to become part of the C++ standard or its TRs. So there is less interest in keeping a scorecard. ...
I found a reference somewhere online (that I can no longer find) claiming, I believe incorrectly, that boost file_system is in C++11.
That isn't correct. Filesystem is on track for C++next, but we won't know for another couple of months whether that means TR2 or a version of the standard itself.
I note that boost.chrono claims to be implemnting C++11 but I would have thought it was other way around and that the boost library was incorporated into the standard.
The Boost Chrono docs are correct. The design of std chrono was influenced by Boost Date-Time, and a number of boost people were involved in chrono's development, but it wasn't a boost library. --Beman