Subject: Re: [boost] Thoughts on Boost v2
From: Michael Caisse (mcaisse-lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-21 12:44:46
[Robert's input didn't come through. Replying so it shows up in the thread.]
On 05/20/2014 08:47 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:51:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Caisse wrote:
> On 05/19/2014 06:47 PM, David Stone wrote:
> > As the author of bounded::integer, I do intend to submit my
> library to
> > Boost at some point, for whatever that is worth. It's just not in
> a state
> > that is ready to submit yet (but soon it will be). I suspect that,
> as a
> > C++14 library, it will have an interesting process getting in, but
> > the next Visual Studio preview will be out by then, which looks
> like it
> > might support all the features I need.
> We welcome C++14 libraries and I see no problem with a submission on
> that basis alone if it is supported by at least two compilers.
> I look forward to your submission David.
> There is one issue that should be addressed. The Current test matrix
> doesn't distinguish between C++ versions. If I make a library
> which requires C++11 and start testing it, it will fail on all test
> platforms which don't support C++11. This creates pressure
> to support earlier versions of C++ when we don't there to be. Currently
> there is no way to tag a library "test for version >= C++11 only".
> We need to tweak the test setup only run tests configurations which
> match the C++ version supported by the library.
> Note that this currently cannot be done with the current test markup for
> a few reasons:
> a) it's extremely tedious
> b) now some compilers have switches like -std=c++11 or such so the
> markup can't be kept in sync with the actual version
> being tested.
> Things that are necessary are:
> a) Each library needs to be marked/tagged as to what it's minimum
> version is.
> b) Each toolset needs to communicate what version of C++ it corresponds to
> c) Only compatible toolsets are actually tested.
> This would show all green results for libraries for which a minimal
> version is required - unlike that which happens now.
> It would also skip useless testing for unsupported configurations
> thereby saving time.
> It would also resolve the whole question of Boost version v2. Each
> library can support the version of C++
> without conflict. Older, core components like Config would support
> everything while newer more specific
> libraries like spirit3 would only support C++14/17 etc..
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk