On 2020-05-23 19:15, degski via Boost wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 06:25, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Next, I disagree with the idea that a library could be "not allowed to progress". Why block further improvements and extensions? Take Boost.Atomic or Boost.FileSystem, for example. These libraries are not equivalent to the standard counterparts, and offer extensions that are useful in practice and cannot be efficiently implemented "on top" of the standard components. What would be the point of a Boost.Atomic v2 if it had to reimplement Boost.Atomic? We are spreading our time thin as it is already.
The progression could be signified by another 'insertion mode' : increases begin(*X*) and executes end(*X*) = begin (*X*) +1.
I'm not sure what you mean here.