Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 and C++11 ABI compatibility for compiled libraries
From: Michael Marcin (mike.marcin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-13 16:35:06

On 5/13/13 12:21 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On Monday 13 May 2013 18:26:38 Klaim - Joël Lamotte wrote:
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Michael Marcin
> <mike.marcin_at_[hidden]>wrote:
>>> Does boost ever claim support for abi compatibility with different
>>> compiler settings? I thought not.
>> I thought boost explicitely, somewhere, stated that binary compatibility is
>> not a requirement for libraries.
>> I remember it being the main argument for developing "booster" which is a
>> "fixed" set of boost libraries used in CPPCMS.
> I think that was about binary compatibility between different releases of
> Boost or its libraries. It's a bit different from compatibility between single
> release builds for different C++ versions.
> Speaking of different releases, Boost does mangle library names with the
> release version, so linked applications will always use the correct binaries.
> This counts in favor for the solution (2), with mangling library names
> differently in C++03 and C++11.

There are also parameters where the names do not encoding important
settings. If the code is compiled for x86 or x64 for instance. The user
is just expected to build and use the libraries they need.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at