Re: [boost] boost.test regression or behavior change (was Re: Boost.lockfree)

Subject: Re: [boost] boost.test regression or behavior change (was Re: Boost.lockfree)
From: Tom Kent (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-10-05 21:27:35

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Gennadiy Rozental <rogeeff_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Bjorn Reese <breese <at> mail1.stofanet.dk> writes:
> > 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.
>
> 1. Without data backing this fact, this statement as good as "Most of our
> users already moved to c++11". If we measure by the compilers used by our
> test runners, 80% of them are running c++11 enabled compilers.
>

I think this is more because 1) compiler versions have been coming out much
more rapidly in recent years and 2) the people who run testers have the
wherewithal to upgrade the tester.

As one of the people who run test cases, I look forward to hearing that a
new compiler has been release, so that I can go get it into the matrix and
keep being complete. However, I would generally consider the old testers
(msvc-8.0, gcc-4.6) the more important ones, as that is what a lot of
people are still stuck with. These people aren't really represented will in
the boost developer community, as developers are much more likely to make
the jump to a new toolset, but I still think it is important that they are
supported by our project.

>
> 2. Those who are not ready to upgrade to new version of the compiler, are
> very likely not going to upgrade to new version of boost, so this
> discussion is irrelevant for them.
>

>From my experience in multiple organizations, this is true about 50% of the
time. The other half, someone stuck with an old compiler (there are lots of
these people still doing active development of new features) wants to get a
bug fix or new feature from boost. I think it is important that we support
them for the foreseeable future.

Tom