Re: [boost] Windows XP support survey

Subject: Re: [boost] Windows XP support survey
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-06 06:47:16

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 6 May 2015 at 13:16, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> > The Boost SC suggested I ask about Microsoft Windows XP support in
>> > Boost libraries here,
>>
>> It seems, we're restarting this thread:
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/245008/
>>
>> (tl;dr; I proposed to raise the default version to Vista in
>> libs/winapi config headers; rejected because XP was still supported at
>> the time).
>
> Yep, a valuable thread for everyone to read. However we are now one
> year after official XP support was stopped by Microsoft, and even if
> we decide this now, the next Boost release will need to announce it's
> the last supporting XP, and only the release after that would target
> the Vista API. I would therefore expect XP support to be switched off
> around October, six months from now.
>
> 18 months past XP termination seems reasonable to me.

I agree.

>> > 3. Their personal opinion about when would be best to drop mandatory
>> > Microsoft Windows XP support. Individual library maintainers can of
>> > course choose to keep supporting it.
>>
>> I think it is more correct to bump the default Windows target to Vista
>> or even 7, if there is any significant difference. Whether or not
>> particular libraries support building for older Windows is a choice of
>> the library maintainers. I don't think there are mandatory
>> requirements on support for a particular Windows version (or a
>> particular OS in general).
>
> I think we're talking about library authors being allowed to require
> _WIN32_WINNT >= 0x600 for their library to compile. Say in their
> config.hpp you'd error out if _WIN32_WINNT is < 0x600.
>
> Whether we actually change _WIN32_WINNT to default to 0x600 or even
> 0x601 I think is a separate matter.

Formally, this was never prohibited. But I think it would be strange
if some libraries didn't build with the default _WIN32_WINNT (or
BOOST_USE_WINAPI_VERSION defined in libs/winapi headers, which I
encourage to use as a configuration point for Boost libraries). So I
think it is related.