Christophe B via Boost-users <boost-users@lists.boost.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Would there be an intent to increase the support of new standard libraries by > boost libraries? On top of my head, I think first to shared_ptr<> and > error_code. > Mixing std libraries and their equivalent in boost is most of the time > tedious. Concretely, it becomes difficult to integrate components and > interoperate them when some adopt std::error_code while others must stick > boost::system::error_code due to constraints (mainly asio and beast. We > thought to migrate to the standalone asio, but there is no equivalent for > beast). Even if some efforts have been done to convert boost error_code to > std ones, this is far from ideal. > > And as mentioned by Martijn Otto, I would opt also for jumping directly to > C++17.
In my company at least, we're still stuck with C++14 because some customers use old toolchains and we use boost. So requiring C++17 would be annoying. Boost is nice for projects that can't use a recent C++ standard as it provides things like boost::optional, boost::variant, boost::filesystem (etc.) instead of the std ones which require newer C++ standards. Dominique _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
