Subject: Re: [boost] transforming ex. boost lib into C++11-only lib?
From: Ben Pope (benpope81_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-22 10:37:19
On Thursday, January 22, 2015 10:20 PM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:
> is it permitted to transform an existing boost library into a C++11-only
There has been some discussion on a C++11-only Boost, and Niall has
BindLib-soon-to-be-called-something-else-lib, which may reify some of
the specifics surrounding that.
In my personal opinion, I would say go for it (I've upgraded to C++14 on
multiple compilers and platforms); anybody that cannot upgrade to a
C++11 compiler should either fight harder, do it anyway and then ask for
forgiveness, or change jobs (in that order).
However, some authors/maintainers of various libraries are stuck with
older compilers for their customers and there's pretty much no way you
can convince them to help in a C++11-only effort, or to help maintain a
C++11-only branch. Also, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Ultimately, if it's your library and you feel it impractical to support
pre C++11 in your library, that's your choice, but you risk upsetting
customers if you break existing code.
So... onto the discussions of inline namespaces, suitable notice and
To pick a specific example (and not to pick on anybody or any library in
particular, but just because it's in my mind), I would say it's easier
and more convenient to move to say, Thread/v4 than it is to consistently
supply myriad defines across multiple build systems.
I would say go for a V(x+1) library and enjoy your coding life. Be
responsible where bugfixes are appropriate, but don't let it prevent you
from making progress*.
*Really; please don't let it prevent you from making progress.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk