On 14 May 2015 at 8:43, Michael Ainsworth wrote:
The quality of C++ code in Boost is unmatched, and the Boost website attributes this to the review process. So while I see “dangers” in modularising Boost (in that it may cause version-compatibility problems), I also see that it is a separate issue to the review process, albeit one that has an impact on it. The “umbrella organisation concept as fitting in quite well with the idea, but I do believe that there should also be an œumbrella project.
The advantage of a Boost 2.0 dependency injection design is that you, the library user, can inject any version of a dependency you like. Obviously injecting a version not supported by the library will fail. Point is, the library *user* gets to choose the configuration from the outside. The library author merely gets to choose what version constraints they will impose (which could be to a single version, but I would imagine users would complain). Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/