Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-26 22:21:21
On 8/26/2018 3:06 PM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Edward Diener via Boost
>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2018 2:33 AM
>> . Telling some library developer/maintainer that they should use some
>> C++11 on up feature for the sole reason that it will require that
>> library to only work with C++11 on up is so illogical that I really can
>> not believe a computer programmer could even think in those terms.
> For the last time: I never suggested to tell a library maintainer to use a C++11 just for the heck of it (or can you
> produce a quote?).
> Actually I stated the exact opposite multiple times from the beginning.
> And I also just explained, why I think just making an announcement and changing the documentation makes a difference
> even if not a single line of code is changed at that particular release.
> Sorry, but from my side it really feels as if you are completely ignoring what I'm writing. Maybe I'll understand better
> what you want from me, once I had a good night's sleep.
You are correct in that I do not understand why making an announcement
that Boost is "dropping support for C++03" is going to make any
difference to anybody, when nothing further changes as far as Boost is
concerned and in fact some Boost libraries continue to support C++03
simply because they do not require C++11 on up features. And if
something further is actually supposed to change regarding Boost other
than making such an announcement, I would love to hear about what it is
from you. I do not believe in doing something for no particular reason
just because someone thinks it sounds 'good'. I am also curious about
what documentation is supposed to be changing when you say "changing the
If I seem belligerent it is because you are only the last of a stream of
people saying that Boost should "drop support for C++03" without saying
what in particular this is supposed to entail, other than Boost
supposedly announcing that this will be the case.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk