Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines to implement Boost library evolution policy (was Boost 2.0)
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-08 19:09:30

On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>

> On 6/8/2014 11:54 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>> Rob Stewart wrote:
>>>> Also, I urge you not to think in terms of language standards. Think in
>>>> terms
>>>> 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.
> I agree this is the best way to work with Boost and the C++ language
> standard. But when I do this I am not thinking "in terms of compiler
> versions and their features" as Stephen Kelly suggests but only in terms of
> C++ features as they are supported by Boost in Config.

Good point.


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