Hey everyone, I don't know if I will get the chance to perform a full review within the review window, but I just wanted to share my limited experience with the library. Back in February I wrote (or more precisely, rewrote in C++) a production numerical simulation code [1] that makes extensive use of Boost.Move because move-but-not-copy semantics were the most natural fit for most of my data objects. (The rationale for this was that in nearly all cases I only wanted one entity to hold a given data object, and in the remaining cases few I could just wrap the data object in a shared_ptr.) Since I wanted to have vectors containing these objects, I made use of the containers::vector class that was bundled with Boost.Move, so the headers for Boost.Move and at least the vector class of the proposed Boost.Containers library have lived in my code for a few months now. Being able to return a vector without having to worry about whether it would be copied was so nice that I eventually just started using boost::containers::vector everywhere I would normally have used std::vector; it was also very nice to be able to use the .emplace* methods to construct elements in place because this saved both some overhead *and* additional typing on my part. (Of course, I will eventually get these things by default in std::vector as soon as C++0x is available everywhere, but it is really nice to have them now! :-) ) The code has been stable enough that I never encounter any problems using it. Now, I don't know what has changed since I coped the Boost.Move+Boost.Container headers into my tree in Febrary so hopefully nothing has been broken, but based on my personal experience using the library I can say that it at least boost::containers::vector seems to work just fine in production code and I would really like to see it be a part of Boost. Cheers, Greg [1] Nutcracker, a matrix product state based quantum simulation code, available at: http://github.com/gcross/Nutcracker