5 Nov
2017
5 Nov
'17
1:21 a.m.
On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote: James E. King, III wrote: I was wondering, does it even make sense to have the default RNG of
uuids::random_generator set to a PseudoRandomNumberGenerator for
boost::uuid? No, in my opinion it doesn't. basic_random_generator has to be retained
for compatibility, but random_generator should just obtain random bytes
directly. You're right that this is a breaking change though - a justified
one, in my opinion. Looks like November 1 was the deadline for making major changes for 1.66.0,
which I assume would include breaking changes...