Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support

Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-25 23:06:42

On 8/25/2018 1:51 PM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
>  From the discussion about abi compatibility when the Boost.System library is
> compiled e.g. in c++03 mode and then included in ac++11 project or vice
> versa
> (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-developers-archive/EWG5NVOZo_
> g)
> 
>>
>> When can we drop C++03 support? :D
> 
> This will probably be ignored or shouted down, but maybe someone just needs
> to make a concrete suggestion about which people can discuss and vote so I'm
> giving it a shot:
> 
> What about the first or second release in 2020 ?

Please define what is meant by "dropping C++03 support" ? This has come 
up repeatedly in the past and I always ask the same question. 
Unfortunately, whatever is meant by "Boost dropping C++03 support" is 
never actually defined. Its is so convenient to say "let's drop C++03 
support" when it does not mean anything. I it like saying "I believe in 
freedom", which also means nothing. We are a technical group. Please 
define what you mean. Then perhaps an intelligent discussion can ensue.

> 
> By then, all major toolchains have had solid c++11 support for at least 5
> years ( I think, msvc was the last one with VS2015) and at least partial
> support for 7+ years (gcc 4.8, msvc 2013, clang 3.3). Also, most likely
> c++20 will be released in that year, which means that c++03 compatible
> libraries would have to support 5 different (and partial incompatible)
> language versions by then (not to mention ABI-compatibility considerations
> between different versions).
> 
> That should also be enough time to ensure that the last c++03 release (late
> 2019) is really solid (for projects that still can't upgrade to c++11) and
> ideally there could be a few more bugfix-releases afterwards as is often
> done by other software projects.
> 
> And before someone starts to raise straw mans: That of course wouldn't mean
> that a particular library *must* no longer compile in 03 mode, but one can
> no longer rely on the boost-internal dependencies remaining c++03
> compatible.
> 
> Best
> 
> Mike