Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled libraries
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-08 23:30:08
On 8 February 2018 at 17:22, Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> degski wrote:
> But, do the libs you quoted use std::optional and std::string_view
>> (instead of their boost impersonations) when compiled with C++17?
> Assuming a non-header-only library for the sake of going back onto the
> topic, this would create exactly the problems we've been discussing, if you
> link your C++17 code to the C++14-built library, or vice versa. For what
I'm probably missing the point. If that C++17 (exe-code) and C++14
(library-code) are built with the same compiler (an unavoidable C++
problem, C is great in some sense!), unless the C++17 code is in the
header, why would it cause problems?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk