Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-27 06:05:56

On 8/27/2018 1:47 AM, degski via Boost wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 at 01:21, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>> 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.
> I purposely did not post in this thread, because I already had the
> discussion on this list, with the same result.
> I have come to a more balanced view since then. The way I see it, is that
> those advocating "drop C++03" have mostly one thing in mind. C++11 is a
> major departure from C++03, because of move semantics (the real moving,
> i.e. not copying stuff). I think Boost could adopt a maybe more subtle view
> of imposing that C++11 moves should be implemented over the board (where
> that makes sense of course), as a rule.

"C++11 moves should be implemented over the board". Please explain what
you mean by that ?

> This does not imply "drop C++03",
> but does mean that peops that did move to C++11 are guaranteed to get what
> they want when using Boost compiled with C++11 and up. I would be happy
> with that. IMO, the alround support of C++11 moves is a more interesting
> question/challenge than moving to CMake.
> degski

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at