Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] boost.test regression or behavior change (was Re: Boost.lockfree)
From: Brian Wood (woodbrian77_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-10-04 16:19:49

Bjorn Reese writes

>On 10/04/2015 12:18 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> Sooner rather than later we should have this discussion and setup
>> IMO it had very little sense to continue to maintain c++03 workarounds.
>> Boost code should be an example how modern c++ libraries should look
>> And c++03 compatibility is directly in a way of this goal.
> You appear to have missed the many discussions on this topic.
> While Boost started out to design cutting-edge libraries, it has been
> caught by its own success. Today there is a large user-base that still
> uses C++03, and that are unlikely to upgrade in the foreseeable future.
> Therefore, the current consensus is that existing libraries should not
> increase their standards requirements. New libraries are free to decide
> their standards requirements (although it will probably be questioned
> during a formal review.)

Support for that is dwindling as more projects adopt 2011
or newer versions of C++.

I understand Gennadiy and Raffi's desire to discuss this issue
again. C++ 2011 is required to use my software. That decision
was also based on limited resources and the belief that C++ 2011
had some helpful things for on line code generation. If I had
more resources, I could support C++ 2003, but at this point
I'm happy to not have to support that. As time goes on, more
people are using C++ 2011 or newer.

Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.

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