Re: [boost] List of C++ 11 only Boost libraries and their status?

-----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 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?

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

Only a little extra work. Sometimes it is trivial, when it would increase potential users to the many stuck with old compilers. 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