Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [system] Would it be possible to trial a breaking change to Boost.System and see what happens?
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-13 00:15:02

>> What we'd like to do is to test whether some very mildly breaking
>> changes to <system_error> are so mild as to affect no users, and on that
>> basis propose WG21 to make those mildly breaking changes to
>> <system_error> in the next C++ standard. And to test this, we'd like to
>> modify Boost.System with those mildly breaking changes, ship a release
>> and see how many users complain. If it is zero, we have evidence for
>> WG21 that this is not a consequential change.
> The usual way is to announce the upcoming change in release nnn and then
> make the change in release nnn + 1. What is wrong with using this method
> in your case, if all parties are in agreement to do it ?

It goes without saying that this forthcoming change would be announced
one release ahead as per Boost custom. So, next release would have it
#ifdef'd off by default, following release #ifdef's it on by default. A
macro would allow users to select which implementation.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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