On 26/10/2012 23:42, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Pavel Sanda <sa...@lyx.org> writes:
| | BTW after some decade we still include boost in our tarballs and maintain
| its updates. What was the original reason and is it still needed?
My preferences are as follows:
0. Standard C++
1. Something with the same apis/behaviour as standard C++
2. Use something that is destined for standardization.
3. third party libraries.
In a lot of cases 1 & 2 is solved by boost, when the stdlib/toolchain at
hand does not support it directly.
My preferences: always favour cleaner, easier to read code.
I agree that C++11 is nice for a lot of things but please don't
re-inject more boost in our source code. We took a lot of time to
understand and simplify some code using advanced template techniques, I
wouldn't want us to go back there. Some people might not agree but our
conversion to use Qt instead of boost simplified and robustified the
code base a lot. Qt is there to stay in our code base so pretty please,
let's just use it when it make sense.
Abdel.
