Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-28 15:17:38
On 8/28/2018 1:11 AM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
> Dear Edward,
> throughout this thread you keep saying that you or the user will
> not understand what
> "dropping c++03 support"
> means and I have to say I find that very hard to believe, as the
> concept of "XXX is not supported" is ubiquitous throughout software
It astounds me that you can not understand that the statement "Boost
dropping c++03 support" is a generality that can mean whatever you think
it means, and that you keep pushing for such a statement being
universally understand by everyone with no further explanation needed.
As you can clearly read by other respondents in this thread, and not
just me, you are dead wrong in your assumption. When some poor end-user
reads "Boost dropping c++03 support" and finds he is still able to
compile some Boost library in C++03 mode and asks why a statement was
made of "Boost dropping c++03 support", I nominate you as the one to
explain to him that
'the concept of "XXX is not supported" is ubiquitous throughout software
and therefore he is a fool to ask such a question.
I do not know whether I agree with your suggestion that a library moving
from C++03 to C++11 should not need to notify end-users of that library
for some prior period of time that it is doing so, but at least that is
a specific suggestion of one of the things that "Boost dropping c++03
support" might mean.
BTW I am not against Boost actually doing specific things which promote
C++11 on up library development or use of C++11 on up for end-users who
use Boost libraries. But those specific things, whatever is decided,
need to be explained to end-users and not just a statement that "Boost
is dropping C++03 support".
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk