On 4/24/15 4:04 AM, Jaakko Järvi wrote:

I think a while back Joel de Guzman promised to handle lambda tickets. Joel, is that still the case?

Best, Jaakko

...

On Apr 23, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Edward Diener wrote:

The maintainer for lambda in the libs/maintainer.txt list is Jaako Jarvi, who is the original author. But I see others who have made changes to the library. So I am wondering if anyone is still actively maintaining the library.

There are a number of pull requests for lambda, related to updating the code for type_traits Version2, by John Maddock and myself. Is someone handling these ?

I'm sorry, but I'm too loaded now to be useful. I think it's best to pass on maintenance to someone else. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.ciere.com http://boost-spirit.com http://www.cycfi.com/

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Edward Diener wrote:

I am willing to handle lambda maintenance. I do not anticipate any major changes, only possible bug fixes, since Boost.Phoenix is a worthy successor to Boost.Lambda functionality. I will ask for admin rights to make any lambda changes that are necessary.

Are there any plans to eventually deprecate/remove Boost.Lambda entirely in favor of Phoenix? -- -Matt Calabrese

On 5/6/2015 7:29 PM, Gary Powell wrote:

AFAIK, Phoenix doesn't have 100% replacement so it should happen in the future, but maybe not right this minute. If any changes to the Lambda library should be made, it would be to remove the result type deduction in favor of calls to decltype. That would cut about 50% of the code out.

At this point I was thinking to just fix any bugs and pay attention to any trac items and PRs. You are one of the library authors. Do you want to address any of these issues yourself ? I have created PRs for some fixes but lambda needs someone to apply them. As for using 'decltype' for compilers in c++11/c++14 mode you would still need to address all those not using c++11/c++14 mode in their code.

Yours, -Gary-

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Matt Calabrese wrote:

...

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Edward Diener wrote:

...

I am willing to handle lambda maintenance. I do not anticipate any major changes, only possible bug fixes, since Boost.Phoenix is a worthy

successor

...

to Boost.Lambda functionality. I will ask for admin rights to make any lambda changes that are necessary.

Are there any plans to eventually deprecate/remove Boost.Lambda entirely in favor of Phoenix?

-- -Matt Calabrese

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost