[flohofwoe]

On the contrary, the one nice thing about C++ is that it is 'multi-paradigm'. Don't like boost's philosophy of overengineering every little detail? Then don't use boost. C++ without exceptions, RTTI, or even the whole STL? Perfectly fine. Other languages don't have this freedom. It's a double-edged sword of course. Less freedom also means wasting less time with pointless discussions about which combination of C++ features is 'right'.

[imron]

> Then don't use boost.

After using boost in several projects and regretting it each time (slow compile times, painful to configure), I finally learned my lesson and "don't use boost" is now one of my guiding principles when programming in C++.

[ndh2]

While I would mostly agree, I would humbly suggest a small nudge in perspective: Boost does not equal Boost. While I passionately hate most of Boost, I find boost::optional to be one of the most useful template classes. So you shouldn't treat Boost as one library, but as a collection of different libraries. Same goes for STL in my opinion.

[imron]

I think boost has definitely had a positive impact on c++ and the fact that large amounts of it are now in (or had a major influence on) the std library certainly makes it much easier to forgoe using it.

[nurettin]

I use boost filesystem and string algos. I can't say they slow down compilation that much. And they save a lot of typing.

[VHRanger]

Theres filesystem TS in c++17. Also experimental/filesystem in all compilers except gcc since 2014

[nurettin]

Sure, threads and datetime has been in certain implementations, too. I think anyone can appreciate the fact that these libraries are not compilation hogs (such as phoenix or mpl) and are portable and save a lot if time.