Subject: Re: [boost] Libraries and C++ compliance
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-11 23:13:21
On 4/11/2017 6:58 PM, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> On 11/04/2017 21:54, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
>> On 04/11/17 02:24, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
>>> There's an official blog post about it:
>> Blog is not documentation. One should not be required to follow blogs or
>> other social media to know how to use a compiler.
> Which is why the second link I posted was an official documentation link.
Finally they have their online docs and they just recently added
downloadable local documentation. It "only" took them a month to have
docs for their product. I am glad to be able to see the compiler switch
docs for VC++17, which gives a good idea of the levels of C++ compliance
which they support with VS2017.
But again I do not see the issue of libraries having to document which
compilers and in which modes they support rather than which level of
coompliance the library supports. It is then up to the end-user to
understand the compiler(s) being used and to use the proper compiler
switches for a given library. My OP was to get library creators to take
seriously the effort to specify the C++ compliance level(s) of their
library in the library docs.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk