Re: ubuntu 18.10

> While the tooling is there, implementations aren’t part of the standard library.
What are you referring to here?

Stephen

On 4/14/19 10:43 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> The issue with Boost is that (1) it is a disorganized zoo of code of wildly varying quality, (2) the design is does violence to your builds, and (3) every release seems to break compatibility with prior releases. The first two are code hygiene issues but the last one is a deal breaker because it means that each C++ dependency will often have a dependency on its own unique version of Boost. It has been a source of pain for a decade but it has traditionally been difficult to avoid.
>
> In fairness, the value of Boost was that it offered sophisticated metaprogramming functionality back when that could only be achieved with deep arcana beyond mortal men. In C++17, most of that can be achieved with a few lines of relatively readable code, rendering it unnecessary.
>
> Modern C++ has enabled some impressive code safety features that allows you to bring C++ much closer to something resembling a high-assurance programming language in a straightforward way. While the tooling is there, implementations aren’t part of the standard library.
>
>
>
>> On Apr 14, 2019, at 9:48 PM, Stephen D. Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> As far as I could tell, the point of Boost was to try out C++ library ideas.  When C++ added a whole lot of things 5-8 years ago, they all seemed to come from Boost.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_(C%2B%2B_libraries)
>> Many of Boost's founders are on the C++ standards <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14882> committee, and several Boost libraries have been accepted for incorporation into both the C++ Technical Report 1 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B_Technical_Report_1> and the C++11 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11> standard.
>>
>> There are certain libraries that always should be installed from a git repo.  It's always a pain to find out which ones those are.
>>
>> sdw
>>
>> On 4/11/19 2:59 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
>>> Boost is a disaster of a library with serious versioning problems that unfortunately is commonly used in many legacy C++ code bases. It largely serves no purpose in the modern C++ world but I expect it to continue inflicting pain for many years to come.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 11, 2019, at 1:55 PM, Gregory Alan Bolcer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> After three weeks of apt repo hell, I finally was able to figure out which
>>>> library (libboost) was causing issues with preventing a completely
>>>> automated upgrade--that and cuda/nvidia geforce driver had to be installed
>>>> from a local download instead of the repository.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else?
>>>>
>>>> Greg

_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork