Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compiler requirements.

Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compiler requirements.
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-03 17:03:20

on Mon Jul 29 2013, Stephen Kelly <steveire-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> I've been working on the modularization effort from a CMake point of view,
> and from an 'actual modularization' point of view, looking at
> interdependencies:
>
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.ryppl.devel/9/focus=26
>
> I'd like to start on reducing interdependencies, and I'd like to start
> reasonably small, as no-one in the boost community knows me and see how it
> goes from there. I'm very active in CMake, Qt and KDE.
>
> Currently, in the modularized boost repos, boost::config and boost::core
> depend on each other. I listed 3 ways of fixing this on the ryppl list:
>
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.ryppl.devel/201
>
> My preference is the removal of
> BOOST_NO_EXPLICIT_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_ARGUMENTS, and requiring compilers to
> have the feature. That way boost/config/suffix.hpp will no longer need to
> include boost/{non_,}type.hpp.

This seems entirely reasonable to me.

> My preference is increasing the compiler requirement, because that may open
> up more similar opportunities for reducing dependencies and
> interdependencies throughout boost.
>
> Grepping indicates that that means increasing the compiler requirements to
> something like __DMC__ > 0x840, 

I'd be shocked if any version of that compiler worked with any
substantial fraction of the Boost codebase.

> GCC > 3.2, BOOST_INTEL_CXX_VERSION > 500, VC++ > 7.0.

+1

-- 
Dave Abrahams