Curious as to if gcc-12 and clang-14 may make it to the release
compiler list for 1.80?
(https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_80_0.html) Is that just
a formality?
I see the regression tests for both look in pretty good shape:
Thanks Beman,
No, including the Boost license doesn't make your source open. There is
nothing in either the new or old Boost licenses which requires that
source
code be redistributed or otherwise made available.
I understand the intention and realize that this is the way it has
always been. It
Matt Hurd wrote:
The author of a derivative work can put in a more restrictive
license
right? In this case, wording that gives the full Boost permission
must
still be included according to the draft license.
This would lead to a license text like:
snip
I am a little confused. Like Jaakko
-Original Message-
Behalf Of Alisdair Meredith
Subject: [boost] Re: resource manager naming
Larry Evans wrote:
Would the GOF name, proxy, be too non-specific? Policy names
might provide
the specifics (whether it's a pointer or a resource).
Proxy, if anything, sends the
I see in the Wiki a couple of comments about variance/std dev with n and n-1
being referred to at the denominator. Just to clear it up:
when it is a complete population the denominator should be n.
when it is a random sample it is n-1.
sample variance = sum(Xi - mean(X))^2/(n-1)
or more
