Re: [boost] Boost is supposed to serve *the entire C++ community; it isn't Boost's goal to serve Boost's community*

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost is supposed to serve *the entire C++ community; it isn't Boost's goal to serve Boost's community*
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-21 12:09:28

On 5/21/2016 11:52 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> Le 21/05/2016 à 15:23, Hartmut Kaiser a écrit :
>>>> I presented a plan for how to technically transition to a C++ 14 only
>>>> Boost 2.0 at my C++ Now 2015 presentation:
>>>>
>>>> https://goo.gl/VFFXUl
>>>>
>>>> The talk was well attended, and by much of the more senior Boost
>>>> community members.
>> What does it mean 'a library is C++14 only'?
> I suspect it means to support >=C++14  compilers only.
>> Does that mean I'm allowed to use only features which have been added by
>> C++14?
> Not for me. For me it means it uses ar least one C++14 feature and needs
> a C++14 compiler. The library doesn't supports C++11 compiler nor C++14
> compilers that don't support the used feature.
>> Or does that mean a library is allowed to use all features defined in the
>> C++14 standard?
> This one. This doesn't mean that it uses all of them, just that the
> author wants the freedom of using them.
>>
>> If the former, then am I still allowed to use 'int' and 'for'?
> -
>> If the latter, Boost is already C++14 only (afaict, no library uses C++17
>> features yet).
> No in my view.
>> Go figure. So let's drop this nonsense of declaring something C++14 only.
>>
> Tell me if my alternative view of what "C++14 only" could mean change
> your view.
>
> Wether we want a "C++14 only" Boost  version is another thing.

What could it possibly achieve to have a Boost with only C++11 or above 
libraries or a Boost with only C++14 or above libraries, as opposed to 
having Boost as we have it now in which each library can choose what 
level of C++ support it requires ? I would really like to get a 
technical answer, as opposed to an emotional response about "moving 
forward" and "looking to the future" and "serving the entire C++ 
community", to that question by those who propose such ideas.