Comment #7 on issue 2013 by [email protected]: clang error flower/file-name.cc
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2013
I would rather see us go in the other direction: use more boost. But instead of (apparently?) copying a boost header file from version 1.0, use the installed boost libraries on the system.
Many people are using boost, parts of it were accepted to the C++0x TR1 standard, and more parts are submitted for the TR2 standard. I think there's less chance of a serious flaw in boost than the chance of our custom code being flawed. Let's not re-invent the wheel, and let's take advantage of all the optimisations and bug-fixing that has already gone into boost.
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
