On 21 May 2014 at 18:06, John Maddock wrote:
On 21 May 2014 at 15:45, Peter Dimov wrote:
I don't understand. Who are those hypothetical people holding back > interesting new development?
Start reading at:
That was a year ago, and it's just words. If I decide to write a new C++11-only library, archived messages in a year-old mailing list thread will not stop me.
I agree, it seems to me there is a great deal of hyperbole here: is Boost really dead and/or being held back? Frankly I don't see it.
The statements were not made without evidence. See the slides at https://github.com/boostcon/cppnow_presentations_2014/blob/master/file s/change_ripple.pdf?raw=true See the position paper at https://github.com/boostcon/cppnow_presentations_2014/blob/master/file s/large_code_base_change_ripple_in_cpp.pdf?raw=true As Robert Ramey pointed out in the talk, the values for boost-users could be a chimera. We need some figures for the popularity of boost related questions on stackoverflow. I may do this for C++ Now 2015. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/