on Fri May 04 2012, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet-AT-wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Le 04/05/12 10:18, John Maddock a écrit :
IMO, every Boost library that has a counterpart in the standard should comply with the standard as much as possible and should use the standard whenever it is possible (that is the class/function is available and the library don't introduce extensions on them). Any deviation from the standard could be seen as a defect and should
either be fixed or described explicitly as a limitation on the documentation.
If we do that then those libraries will wither and die, Boost authors should be able to continue to enhance and expand capability, possibly with a view towards the *next* standard. Besides just because the standard reflects best practice right now, that doesn't mean that future tricks won't come along that improve things further.
I don't see how my point of view disable to enhance the capacity of the library. Replace if you want "describe explicitly as a limitation" by "describe explicitly the differences.
I think it comes down to a difference in interpretation of "any deviation." IIUC, you meant to allow pure extensions, but John didn't read it that way. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com