On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 02:51:30PM -0500, Nevin Liber wrote:
On 30 June 2012 10:43, Lars Viklund <zao@acc.umu.se> wrote:
There's a major difference between C++98 and C++11. Before '98, there was no standard. Before '11, there is a perfectly usable standard that bajillions depend on.
And there is a perfectly useable Boost they can use with it.
I'm just fearing that there'll be more premature C++11 taint by the day in Boost, making it less and less usable on C++03 as versions come out.
Why is it premature? It doesn't make Boost less useable on C++03; it just means that less and less *new* libraries will be for that dead end dialect of C++.-- Nevin ":-)" Liber <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com> (847) 691-1404
Please let me in through the dimensional portal where there's widely spread compilers that properly targets C++11. It's cold on this side. Seriously though, are you proposing that anyone that has to use C++03 should be locked for all eternity at some ancient Boost version, even though there's functionality in newer ones they very much would like to use? Should we doom a large majority of developers to keep personal patch sets against their Boosts, resulting in a largely fragmented and impossible-to-handle ecosystem? Things might get slightly less horrible with modularized Boost, where everyone can run their own vaguely compatible "releases" of Boost, but it's still a major support nightmare. I see this primarily from an end-user support and end-user perspective, not as any library author or release mangler. -- Lars Viklund | zao@acc.umu.se