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

Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-29 15:36:25

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Glen Fernandes via Boost
> Sent: 29 August 2018 14:47
> To: Boost
> Cc: Glen Fernandes
> Subject: Re: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
> 
> Edward Diener wrote:
> > Other than not removing useful Boost libraries which support c++03 as
> > well as all subsequent C++ standard levels, and not telling people that
> > they can not use such libraries in c++03 mode if they actually want to
> > do so, I am perfectly willing to let others, including yourself, decide
> > the best way in which support for c++03 in Boost is reduced. My argument
> > has always been that putting a generalized statement on the website,
> > without explaining what it actually entails as far as using Boost
> l> ibraries is concerned, is going to lead to confusion and puzzlement
> > from end-users and endless questions. What can it possibly cost to
> > actually explain of what "Boost dropping support for c++03" actually
> > consists, when it is finally decided what Boost is going to do in this
> > area ? If it is a matter of correct grammar or exposition in the
> > explanation, I will gladly volunteer to write it if no one else wants to
> > do so.
> 
> +1.
> 
> It sounds like what we're going to communicate to users is that Boost
> library authors or maintainers are no longer required to make their
> libraries support C++03. Which sounds fine to me. I don't think
> library maintainers should be confined by users (even if the users are
> other Boost libraries) if they don't want to be.
> 
> Any Boost library maintainers that wish to continue supporting their
> C++03 users will do so. Any other Boost library maintainers that
> depend on such libraries can drop the dependency on those libraries.

+1

(though I think this was always the case.  But clarity is never bad?)

Paul

PS And I'd favour pushing forward from C++11 as quickly as possible.  People should plan and budget to move forward every few years
providing manpower, hardware and software resources to do so.