5 Nov
2017
5 Nov
'17
1:21 a.m.
On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost
wrote:
James E. King, III wrote:
I was wondering, does it even make sense to have the default RNG of uuids::random_generator set to a PseudoRandomNumberGenerator for boost::uuid?
No, in my opinion it doesn't. basic_random_generator has to be retained for compatibility, but random_generator should just obtain random bytes directly. You're right that this is a breaking change though - a justified one, in my opinion.
Looks like November 1 was the deadline for making major changes for 1.66.0, which I assume would include breaking changes...