Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled libraries
From: Richard Hodges (hodges.r_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-11 20:32:33

> Boost would basically be saying to end-users, if you are using
such-and-such a library we can no longer test it in C++03 mode.

Compiler vendors are not going to focus on improving legacy support for
outdated standards. Why should boost? I don't see any new web programs
being written in javascript version 3, on node v1, targeting an IE 5
client. Why should people who insist on doing that in c++ be supported? It
just wastes everyone else's time.

The message should be, "upgrade your compiler, or get out of the way.
You're holding everyone else up with your buggy old non-conforming
compiler."

I have seen some lame excuses as to why people can't (won't) upgrade, and
that's fine, if people are happy with legacy compilers then presumably
they're happy with legacy versions of libraries. Let them remain on boost
1.66.

All this legacy support simply clutters up boost and makes it unnecessarily
complicated.

Arguably, boost has more market penetration than any one compiler. If word
gets around that a vendor's compiler is not compatible with boost, that
vendor is at risk of people dropping their garbage compiler like a hot
stone. This is in reality no different to being incompatible with the
standard library. It would be commercial suicide. They will fix their
compilers rather than lose market share.

c++ needs to move forward. Slavish devotion to backwards compatibility is a
burden it can not afford.

R

On 11 February 2018 at 19:36, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]
> wrote:

> On 2/11/2018 8:25 AM, Paul A. Bristow via Boost wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of degski
>>> via Boost
>>> Sent: 09 February 2018 20:56
>>> To: boost
>>> Cc: degski
>>> Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled
>>> libraries
>>>
>>> On 9 February 2018 at 14:48, Edward Diener via Boost <
>>> boost_at_[hidden]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The issue with Boost Test is that if it now requires a C++11 level
>>>> compiler to use it, every library which tests itself using Boost Test
>>>> now
>>>> requires a C++11 level compiler to run its tests.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So, unless this requirement is lifted, the Rubicon has already been
>>> crossed...
>>>
>>
>> In a sense, yes, but Boost.Test C++03 from release 1.66 still exists.
>>
>
> That does little good for testing latest changes.
>
>
>> So those who stay with C++03 won't be able to rely on the tester-runners
>> to test updated libraries, but they can still use
>> Boost.Test C++03 to run the test themselves - if they care.
>>
>
> I would find it a bit alarming if testing a Boost library, which uses
> Boost Test as its testing infrastructure, can no longer be done in C++03
> mode for various compilers. Boost would basically be saying to end-users,
> if you are using such-and-such a library we can no longer test it in C++03
> mode.
>
> Since I offered my solution to this quandary with CXXD, and since I have
> seen no solution in this thread that is better than what I offered, it is
> useless for me to comment further about trying to solve the problem. But
> Boost should understand exactly what they are telling end-users if this
> change has been made or will be made to Boost Test.
>
>
>
>> Or they can freeze their Boost version completely continuing with the
>> bugs they know and love.
>>
>> I suspect the Laggards will just muddle on?
>>
>> Meanwhile the Modernizers can muddle forward - it clearly isn't
>> straightforward.
>>
>> I think that the current process is working OK just as Daniel James's
>> updated guidance (good - thanks) suggests
>>
>> https://beta.boost.org/development/requirements.html#Backwar
>> ds_compatibility
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> ---
>> Paul A. Bristow
>> Prizet Farmhouse
>> Kendal UK LA8 8AB
>> [phone]
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman
> /listinfo.cgi/boost
>