Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| If we decide someday that Qt should be replaced by something else
| then, provided that proper encapsulation is done in support, I am
| really confident that there is absolutely *no* lock-in. We will just
| have to rewrite part of support/*.cpp, that's all. The situation would
| be exactly the same as with another library (libxml for example). As
| for boost, it's usage is spread all over the source code and the real
| technical lock-in is there IMHO. I like boost personally but, as
| long
You realize of course that much of your use of boost is boost
libraries that will be in the next standard?
I grant you that smart pointers, tuples and functions are OK to use in
general code. Maybe the bind family too. But I am pretty sure that
boost::signal and boost::fs will not be in TR1. So I stand on my point.
| as it is not a standard, we should not use it outside of support. And,
| no, forecasting that part of boost will become a standard 20 years in
| the future does not count :-)
What about 1 year?
You mean the TR1? I didn't know it was so close. Good to know indeed.
Do you know if the TR1 library will be supported by gcc versions < 4.4?
If not than this means that we will still have to use boost instead.
Abdel.
The essentials of tr1 (function, bind) come already with the current gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/branches/gcc-4_2-branch/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/include/tr1/
--
Peter Kümmel
