Re: [boost] [c++11]

Subject: Re: [boost] [c++11]
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-06-18 16:04:00

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely
<jwakely.boost_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> On 18 June 2013 20:13, Thomas Heller wrote:
> > Am 18.06.2013 21:09 schrieb "Jonathan Wakely":
> >>
> >> On 18 June 2013 19:46, Thomas Heller wrote:
> >> > I will support you in your efforts for going for a C++11
> >> > based solution under the condition that boost will move on and
> deprecate
> >> > all libraries that will be unusable with a C++03 compiler. Maybe
> > Boost.AFIO
> >> > should be the library that advocates and pushes this breaking change.
> >>
> >> Huh?  You're suggesting deprecating C++11-only libraries before
> >> they're even added?
> >
> > The other way around. Move on with C++11 and get rid of the C++03 cruft.
>
> I'm still confused, now you're advocating making all libraries C++11-only?
>

Depends. Some might not be needed anymore and most will probably look
completely different in C++11

>
> What libraries get deprecated?
>
> Do you mean deprecate C++03 *compilers*?
>

I mean moving on to C++11, whatever that may mean. I obviously don't have a
roadmap for that handy or any idea how such a change might look like. It
was simply a statement saying "I would be totally OK to move on to C++11,
whatever that means". This has to be properly discussed.

>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>