Subject: Re: [boost] [c++11]
From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-06-17 13:33:46
On 17 June 2013 18:17, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Monday 17 June 2013 10:39:10 Michael Marcin wrote:
>> If you need a C++03 version of a C++11 only library and you feel it is
>> not an unreasonable amount of work to provide you could just fork the
>> library into your own github and do the backporting.
> I wasn't suggesting making the library strictly C++03-compatible. My main
> point was that the library has to be compatible with _todays_ and even better
> - _yesterdays_ compilers to be actually useful. My choice of "reasonable" time
> frame is 3-5 years, as I mentioned. That includes VS 2008 and VS 2010, which
> already had some C++11 features, including rvalue references. Making VS 2013
> absolute minimum is a no-go, IMHO.
The portability requirements disagree.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk