Re: [boost] [MPL lite or MPL 2] A modest proposal

-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of pmenso57@comcast.net Sent: 07 March 2015 00:30 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [MPL lite or MPL 2] A modest proposal

----- Original Message -----

...

From: "Bruno Dutra"

...

2015-03-06 15:13 GMT-03:00, Robert Ramey :

...

My proposal is a response to suggestions that we might address the mpl maintenance problem by eliminating support for older compilers and standards. In my opinion, the suggestion has merit in that writing mpl using C++11 features would result in something much easier to maintain and understand. Of course this would not be compatible with C++03 compilers.

2c: I would be against another metaprogramming library _unless_ it was based on thoroughly modern C++. It is long past time for Boost to start pushing compilers again at a fundamental compiler implementation level.

+1 Leaving MPL_1 behind means it should aim for Tip-Of-Tree compiler versions so see how much benefit can be gleaned from using C++17ish syntax. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830