C++ 11 and Boost

Derek Atkins warlord at MIT.EDU
Wed Jul 23 10:19:33 EDT 2014

John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> writes:

> On Jul 22, 2014, at 5:13 PM, Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> wrote:
>> Lance Edgar <lance at edbob.org> writes:
>>> On 07/21/2014 02:15 AM, John Ralls wrote:
>>>> Done. To 1.48, just for a cushion. It is likely temporary, though,
>>>> because boost::log was introduced in 1.54, and we'll probably want
>>>> to use that to replace g_log. Also 1.53 introduced some C++14
>>>> concurrency libraries that we might want to use so that we don't
>>>> have to force C++14-compatible libstdc++/libc++.
>> If we're going to move away from g_log, any reason we don't just use
>> log4c(++)?  It's pretty much the "logging standard", IMHO.
> Because it would be yet another dependency and because in C++ the only
> thing more standard that Boost is the standard itself?

I beg to differ (at least on the second part).  Yes, log4c(++) would be
a new dependency, but it's been in distributions for the better part of
a decade now.  log4j has been the defacto Java logging platform forever,
and log4c(++) is the c/c++ equivalent.  I used it in projects a decade
ago.  So yes, I do believe it can be considered the "logging standard"
for application development, even if it's not part of the "C++"
standard.  I'd rather see us use log4c(++) than require a 'newer'
version of boost.

> Regards,
> John Ralls


       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list