Peter Dimov-2 wrote
Bruno Dutra wrote:
Oh well, I guess you convinced me to at least postpone it. I'll branch off from what I've got so far and strip every C++03 out of it.
I feel obliged to encourage you to not do that. People may maintain that C++03 compatibility doesn't matter, but it still does, to a surprising extent. There is considerable value in MPL2 being a drop-in replacement for MPL1. One might even argue that this is the whole point of it.
But don't we already have MPL1 for that? If one has to make MPL2 more complex to support MPL1 - wouldn't that defeat the whole point of the project? Robert Ramey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/MPL-and-MPL-core-tp4673889p4673987.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.