On 13 May 2012 at 14:31, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
> > I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original
> > developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting
> > C++11 standard libraries.
>
> Can you elaborate a litt
On 13 May 2012 at 21:28, Michele De Stefano wrote:
> I read that post from Jim Bosch and I thought he knew something more about
> Boost Python development.
What Jim didn't mention is how BPL v2 (the current version) was first
written. Basically, Berkeley paid Dave Abrahams a chunk of money to
(
On 05/13/2012 03:28 PM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
> I would simply like to be re-ensured that Boost Python development is
> going on, because I like this library a lot.
You are not alone ! :-)
Stefan
--
...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
_
I'm sorry,
I understand that with my argumentation I've given the wrong idea of what I
meant.
I read that post from Jim Bosch and I thought he knew something more about
Boost Python development.
Then I completely agree that a library is absolutely not dead also if it
does not support C++ 11. Per
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
> I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original
> developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting
> C++11 standard libraries.
Can you elaborate a little on what you mean by "supporting C++ 11" ?
Specifically, i
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers
of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11
standard libraries.
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to
die or if it is k
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of
Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard
libraries.
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die
or if it is kept up to date by someone else.
Who are the current
