From: Gero Peterhoff (g.peterhoff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-12-27 02:26:05
> The C++ committee hasn't really been able to replace Boost. It's too slow and cumbersome.
That's right. However, the results are often more intuitive and the implementations faster (if adopted).
> Boost has had a large role in saving C++ from decline into obscurity.
I don't see it that bad. Of course, boost kicked the ass of the C++ committee, otherwise they would probably never get out of their pots.
boost has done a lot for C++11. On the other hand, quite a few libs got stuck on this standard (incl. many emulations for C++98/03) which were then never updated/archaic code was not removed, which leads to increasing problems.