Subject: Re: [boost] c++03 library survey
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-29 18:39:17
On 08/29/2018 10:13 AM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
> Well, there have been some voices (here and in the related thread) that
> claimed that using c++11 would be of no value for some libraries and I was
> wondering if this is a common opinion.
It depends on the library. For Boost.Random, maintaining
C++03 compatibility is not a significant burden, and C++11
doesn't make much difference. Boost.TypeErasure, on the
other hand, is #ifdefed so heavily that it's essentially
two completely independent libraries that happen to share
the same API. Note that I do intend to remove the C++03
code path, when I get around to it, and this is entirely
consistent with Boost policy.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk