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

Subject: Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled libraries
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-17 18:55:59

On 2/17/18 9:50 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> Coming into this thread late, but this is of relevance:
> 
> <https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2017/cpp/>
> <https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2017/10/jb-cpp-at-cppcon-2017/>
> 
> 66% regularly use C++11
> 46% don't plan to upgrade to a new C++ standard
> 21% regularly use C++03
> 
> 41% mostly use C++11
> <5% mostly use C++03
> <3% mostly use C++98
> 
> I think investment in C++03 yields significantly diminished returns.
> And C++11 is simply the most popular version.

> In light of this information, I would drop support for C++03 and
> require C++11 going forward.

What does "drop support" mean?

a) libraries should fail to compile with C++03?  Any library which does 
so should be considered "broken" in some sense?

b) libraries should/must be implemented in C++11(+?)?  Any library which 
isn't should/would be considered "broken"

c) libraries should/must be compilable with C++11(+?)? Any libraries 
which don't would be considered broken.

Currently boost only requires that libraries be consistent with the 
latest current standard - which would be C++17 now.  So technically any 
library which doesn't compile with a standards conforming compiler 
would/should be considered broken.  As it turns out, this doesn't isn't 
really much of a burden.  The serialization library, first added to 
boost in (2004?) still functions with the latest standard with a little 
help from boost/config.hpp.  Once in a while something breaks when a new 
compiler standard comes out.  So far maintaining compatibility with the 
latest standard only requires an occasional trivial tweak to eliminate a 
a compile time error.  C++ is good that way.  Oh - and btw - still 
functions as well (or better) than it ever did with C++03.  So from my 
standpoint the correct answer is c)  And the current situation isn't 
broken and doesn't need any kind of fix.

Robert Ramey