Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines to implement Boost library evolution policy (was Boost 2.0)
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-08 11:54:31
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
> Rob Stewart wrote:
>> Also, I urge you not to think in terms of language standards. Think in
>> of compiler versions and their features.
> Realistically this requires a knowledge of particular compilers and their
> versions that it is nearly impossible for any particular developer to have.
> Am I really expected to use or not use a C++ language feature in a
> particular release of my theoretical library because Compiler X, version Y
> does or does not support some C++11/C++14 feature ? I do not believe such
> thinking is conducive to expert programming.
A developer does not have to track compiler/library releases. Boost.Config
macros take care of tracking, backed up by the regression testers.
Also Compilers are starting to support the C++ committee's Standing
Document 6. See
and that should help Boost.config track who is supporting what.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk