Hi,     I am attempting to do a cost benefit analysis to justify adopting the subset of C++11 that is supported by gcc 4.7. I believe there is a strong case for doing so from just the minor features and library improvements. However, I am having a hard time putting together a convincing cost benefit analysis (actually I would like to be able to do this with parts of boost too - any help with this would be great). I have many subjective arguments for boost, C++11 and TR1 but am tasked with trying to justifying any change in terms of costs and benefits. One of Boost's roles is to fill in gaps in c++ support where compiler vendors have not yet provided an implementation. I know that g++4.7 has incomplete support for multi-threading but it is unclear whether this is in the core language area and/or library area and what platforms it applies to. I am specifically interested in GNU/Linux. The status of boost for gcc4.7 is unclear (I know it has not been officially released yet but the status for gcc 4.6.2 is also unclear). Both of the following links from www.boost.org are several years and versions out of date http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_34_0/status/compiler_status.html http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/ Will boost.thread work as a drop in replacement for std::thread or is anything missing or broken on the core language side? (On the gcc side I am also interested in whether std::thread is a sufficiently complete implementation of the standard that boost.thread might not be necessary). The answer to this question may make my work harder. I was asked to justifiy either TR1, some part of boost or C++11 as my preference. I opted for C++11 as the most useful. I would probably have to justify boost libraries on a case by case basis. Justifying use of C++11 actually amounts to justifying a compiler upgrade + possibly training + possibly boost.thread As threads are one of the biggest features of c++11, I may be asked to justify just boost.thread vs gcc 4.7 + boost.thread. Surprisingly another thing that is unclear is the exact set of boost libraries that were included in C++11. I don't have either the standard (other than the February draft http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/n3242.pdf) or a good summary of the standard to hand. Suprisingly neither the boost website nor the g++ page have a list either, though the following two links are helpful: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_48_0/?view=filtered_std-tr1 http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_48_0/?view=filtered_std-proposal I found a reference somewhere online (that I can no longer find) claiming, I believe incorrectly, that boost file_system is in C++11. This isn't mentioned on: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_48_0/libs/filesystem/v3/doc/index.htm But nor its is presence in the 2005 "TR2" proposal. I worry that the 2005 TR2 proposal may be confused with any real TR2 proposal following on from C++11. I note that boost.chrono claims to be implemnting C++11 but I would have thought it was other way around and that the boost library was incorporated into the standard. http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_48_0/doc/html/chrono.html Anyway, the closest I've come to a list of libraries in C++11 outside of n3242 is: http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#library Regards, Bruce.