Yes, but at some point we have to ship a boost release.
[ We've had this discussion many times in the past - "should we delay Boost 1.XX because VS XX.yy will be released next week", and we've pretty much always said - "Nope - we're shipping" ]
Note that this is not a commentary on the current details - just a general observation. Completely agreed. But this does also highlight the importance of proper workarounds. The current thing is a great example: A workaround for a MSVC bug was included in the RC. However the code for
that was invalid C++ and guarded by a `_MSVC >= xxxx` version macro. Hence a bug in MSVC was fixed by using another bug in MSVC with the assumption the latter will not be fixed (soon). My point is: Even those workarounds should be expected to work in the future by using proper C++ (as far as possible) which now is the case (thanks for the ones working on that). I see that once a project switched to a Boost version they stay there for quite a while and for those this will be a huge problem (Please don't argue that they could simply update boost. Sometimes newer Boost have breaking changes/new bugs in other libraries that prevent this [Boost.Serialization e.g.]) Alex Grund