can it remove dependency of boost? about cpprestsdk

[grahamreeds]

My personal opinion (which is the only one that matters) is that boost
should start removing items. If you are stuck on a prehistoric compiler you
can still use 1.60 but if you are on clang or gcc6 then you could use
boost2 which has all those features that appeared in the major compiler
release removed. The libraries themselves are modified to use the standard
libraries.

I've seen new projects where devs were using boost::shard_ptr despite being
available in both 4.8.4 and VC2013 natively (bind was another).

Sent from my Nexus 5.
On 8 Jul 2016 6:22 a.m., "Yonggang Luo" [email protected] wrote:

Boost is too big to use, maybe once C++17 comes out, the boost depends
could be able to be removed.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#60 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AEy9nG_qNnlHxPwFpaEeGI7xGwbFyyFuks5qTd6AgaJpZM4HLWL8
.

[lygstate]

Boost is too big to use, maybe once C++17 comes out, the boost depends could be able to be removed.

[ras0219-msft]

On Windows, we only use boost for our tests and for websockets. If you disable websockets on windows, this should remove the requirement for boost.

However, on other platforms we use it to provide the backing threadpool and it can't be removed.

Is there some other way to replace Boost with something else for threadpool?

[ras0219-msft]

In addition to the threadpool, we also use boost asio for our entire socket implementation on non-windows. If you were only using the library for JSON parsing, it might be possible. Otherwise, I don't see how it would be possible without rewriting most of the library.

[grahamreeds]

To be fair, asio is also available in a non boost flavour.

Sent from my Nexus 5.
On 5 Feb 2016 1:24 a.m., "Robert Schumacher" [email protected]
wrote:

In addition to the threadpool, we also use boost asio for our entire
socket implementation on non-windows. If you were only using the library
for JSON parsing, it might be possible. Otherwise, I don't see how it would
be possible without rewriting most of the library.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#60 (comment)
.

[ras0219-msft]

This is interesting. It's possible that we could use Non-boost ASIO, we have not looked into that. Does that actually make it easier to use the library?

[owlcall]

Greetings, I would like to see if any progress has been made with respect to removing boost (or at least to see if a roadmap decision or goal was made). We are intrigued by the library and it's being rather elegant and cross-platform - but boost is just too heavy of a dependency to carry. We tried and put effort forth, too - but alas it's too huge. Please kindly revisit this issue.

[grahamreeds]

This is interesting. It's possible that we could use Non-boost ASIO, we
have not looked into that. Does that actually make it easier to use the
library?

Not really. Exactly the same calls. Just has asio:: and not boost::asio::
prefix.

GR