Re: [boost] Guidelines to implement Boost library evolution policy (was Boost 2.0)

Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines to implement Boost library evolution policy (was Boost 2.0)
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-08 17:45:51

On 6/8/2014 11:54 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> Rob Stewart wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Also, I urge you not to think in terms of language standards. Think in
>>> terms
>>> of compiler versions and their features.
>>>
>>
>> Realistically this requires a knowledge of particular compilers and their
>> versions that it is nearly impossible for any particular developer to have.
>> Am I really expected to use or not use a C++ language feature in a
>> particular release of my theoretical library because Compiler X, version Y
>> does or does not support some C++11/C++14 feature ? I do not believe such
>> thinking is conducive to expert programming.
>>
>
> A developer does not have to track compiler/library releases. Boost.Config
> macros take care of tracking, backed up by the regression testers.

I agree this is the best way to work with Boost and the C++ language 
standard. But when I do this I am not thinking "in terms of compiler 
versions and their features" as Stephen Kelly suggests but only in terms 
of C++ features as they are supported by Boost in Config.