Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasingcompilerrequirements.
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-05 10:45:55

on Mon Aug 05 2013, Stephen Kelly <> wrote:

> On 08/05/2013 10:33 AM, John Maddock wrote:
>>>> I suspect from a purely practical perspective, few libraries are still
>>>> compatible with that compiler, so I'm inclined to agree we might as
>>>> well drop support. Of course that opens a whole can of worms, because
>>>> if we agreed to that then there's a whole slew of config macros (and
>>>> associated workarounds) that can be removed.
>>> How is that 'a can of worms' rather than 'a good thing' ?
>> Well, can it not be both? ;-)
> No, it can't be a can of worms at all.
> It's simply a benefit/effect/consequence of bumping the compiler
> requirement.

I think *maybe* John is worried about potential downstream code breakage
from removing config macros.

Dave Abrahams

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