Il lun 29 giu 2020, 11:16 Paul A Bristow via Boost ha scritto:

Boost has spawned several standards, but also provided many libraries that are entirely unsuitable for standardization. I hope this will continue.

Paul Bristow

PS I have always been impressed by the overwhelmingly politeness of interchanges on Boost and WG21 etc, in contrast to the internet in general. I believe that Boost is also entirely gender and color-blind.

I am a long time boost user and subscriber to this mailing list, even if I never authored a boost library. That said, since the topic is on the relevance of boost for the future and how it is perceived, I take the liberty to add my 2 cents, for what they are worth. I may be oldish (I still feel young inside) and I see the points raised in favour of more "modern" approaches but I think that *this specific* ml is still working. I suspect that the reason is in no small part due to Paul's observation re: politeness and the continued effort to argue on technical merits. This ml is without doubt the place where I have learnt and continue to learn the most about c++ and software design in general. The only inherent flaw in the "mailing list medium" is the difficulty of tracking the subject changes in the headers, but I don't think that switching to a forum or to a "social network" like stackoverflow would change that. For me, I would probably not have the time to browse such a platform (I fully acknowledge that if more people feel differently this could be a net positive!). In short: please continue with a rigorous review process, without relaxing the standards! I promise that the next time that a library where I am not a complete ignorant is proposed will try to add my review. It will surely be short and not as deep as many of you are able to provide, but Boost has excellent review managers who are able to make something of every contribution. Best, Francesco