Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compilerrequirements.
From: Jonathan Wakely (jwakely.boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-05 18:44:57
On 5 August 2013 23:19, Sergey Cheban wrote:
> 05.08.2013 23:29, Jonathan Wakely Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐµÑ:
>>> Ok, what about dropping the antique C++03? Do you know the current users'
>>> demands? I don't, really. So, I think that it would be interesting to see
>>> the survey results anyway.
>> C++03 is not an antique, it's one version before the current standard.
>> Noone is suggesting only supporting the current version of compilers.
> 1. C++03 is exactly as old as Visual Studio 2003 is.
What makes age in years the right measurement?
C++03 is ten years old but one standard old. VS2003 is 10 years old
but something like five versions old.
What part of "it's one version before the current standard" wasn't clear?
> 2. I was not asking you about your opinion. I was asking about your
> _knowledge_ of user demands.
I already stated it at the top of the thread.
> Well, the user demands is not the only reason for the Boost community
> decisions. But it is important.
> Other reasons are:
> - code clearness
> - ease of development
> - runtime performance
> - ability to test the Boost libraries with the compiler
> PS. What would you say if the survey showed that nobody really needs the
> C++03 to be supported? I think that such results are possible in the
> not-so-distant future.
Then by all means consider removing it, but until you have numbers
that's a strawman.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk