Re: [boost] c++03 library survey

Subject: Re: [boost] c++03 library survey
From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-28 17:36:20

> - Which library/ies are you maintaining? (I assume this isn't some
>    sort of private information - otherwise ignore the question)

Too many ;)

Math, Multiprecision, Regex, Type_traits, Config

> - Would you like to unconditionally use c++11 features if you would
>    not have to worry about this breaking boost internal users?

Multiprecision: Builds with 03, but already makes fairly heavy C++11 
use, and C++11 or later is really required for full functionality. C++03 
support requires little maintenance other than some #ifdef's for rvalue 
refs etc.  Fairly heavy use of noexcept is also used, but IMO this is an 
untestable abomination anyway.  Generalised constexpr in C++14 is more 
useful than C++11, along with really robust SFINAE and enable_if support 
(in theory this is C++11-ish, but there are many early C++11 compilers 
which choke on the code, along with more recent C++03 compilers which 
handle things fine).

Math: historically needs nothing that isn't in C++03.  Constexpr support 
has been gradually added to parts of the library, but is easy to 
macro-ise around.  Recently, some new components have been added which 
are more like C++14 as they really need generalised lambdas to work 
well.  The nicest feature to have would be constexpr-if, but that's C++17.

TypeTraits: All the old C++98 cruft is still there, I don't intend to 
ever change it, and if someone files a bug against say VC7.1, the answer 
will be "upgrade your compiler".  There are C++11,14 and 17 isms 
throughout added to support newer features in new compilers. Many traits 
only work correctly post C++11.  The whole thing could probably be 
greatly simplified post C++11, but I don't see much gain from going 
through and ripping out the old code.  For folks that want to read the 
source, I try to keep the "modern"/conforming implementation first in 
the file, at least in new code.

Regex: was obviously designed when C++98 was still being formulated ;)Â  
Rvalue refs are the only C++11 feature that's nice to have, other things 
like C++17's string_view support will gradually get added in time no doubt.

>
> - Would you like to unconditionally use c++11 features if you would
>    not have to worry about this breaking any users?

Not especially, though I dare say I would just to save a few #ifdef's in 
new code.

>
> - Would you deprecate your library completely if there were no
>    boost-internal users and your current dependencies required
>    c++11 (e.g. because your library has been merged into the c++11
>    standard library anyway)

No.  While regex is in the std, I believe Boost.Regex continues to offer 
useful enhancements.
Type_traits is an interesting one - if people stop using it, then 
deprecation might be an option.

>
> - Are you yourself using any boost library (in an up-to-date version)
>    in a c++03, non-boost project?

No.
>    
> - Do you have any Idea if the latest versions of your library is
>    used by any important/significant number of c++02 projects?
>    [It is only important if *you* consider those projects important
>     and or the number significant]

No.  Generally I get more bug reports relating to very recent C++ 
versions that I haven't quite caught up with yet.  Of course these are 
mature libraries, so the C++03 side of things should be pretty stable.

HTH, John.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus