I'm using 1.49.0, but I don't really use many of the actively developed newer features - mostly smart pointers, format, regex, random - all things that are in C++ 11, but I can't use C++ 11 with our build system at work.
I haven't really dug into much of what seems like the "fancier" stuff - I wrote an Obj reader for Alembic using boost::spirit, and I'd say that was not really that successful - the code takes a really long time to compile and produces a gigantic executable. I'm sure I'm doing it wrong, but I think that's one of the problems with hyper-templating, coding intuition gets lost. I use boost::python heavily, but I'm wrapping really simply global functions and flat structs, so I haven't really had to change usage since I started with it on 1.39. I still have to modify the boost build jam files to add -fPIC to static library compiles, which normally it will only add to the shared library compiles. This is really frustrating. As soon as C++ 11 becomes more widely supported, I believe I can drop boost for everything except boost::python, and I think this is a big impediment to wider adoption of open source libraries with boost dependencies. On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Piotr Stanczyk <pstanc...@ilm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Out of interest, what boost version are people using most commonly? Anyone > hitting the dizzy heights of 1.50? > > Cheers, > > Piotr > > > _______________________________________________ > Openexr-devel mailing list > Openexr-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel > > -- I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And we're just the guys to do it.
_______________________________________________ Openexr-devel mailing list Openexr-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
