Subject: [boost] A possible date for dropping c++03 support
From: Mike Dev (mike.dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-30 17:34:28
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Glen Fernandes via Boost
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 11:55 PM
> On 8/30/2018 8:02 AM, Mike Dev via Boost wrote:
> > [snip]
> Looks generally good. A few things:
> > [Add some fluff here?]
> 1. No fluff.
Well, I imagined that there would be some "Hello everyone, we hereby announce ..."
but that should probably be added by whomever or whatever entity actually does
> > - Problems that only manifest on not supported compilers  or in c++03
> > mode will not block a release, and will probably not be fixed at all.
> 2. Just "will not block a release". No "probably not be" part. This
> announcement does not need to speculate on what individual library
> maintainers will do. Let users contact the library maintainers if they
> want that support.
> > As always, individual library maintainers are of course free to continue
> > their support of older language versions and compilers and we generally don't
> > expect the introduction of a lot of new c++11 code without a clear benefit.
> 3. This should also just end at the "free to continue their support of
> older language versions and compilers" part. No "and we generally
> don't" part. If a library maintainer wants to introduce new C++11 and
> break compatibility, the users should not be given avenue for
> complaint if they feel it is "without clear benefit".
agreed, I was just sticking to the points mentioned by James E. King,
but not all of that needs to be in the announcement
> > However, many libraries may become incompatible with c++03 just by virtue of
> > depending on another library that previously supported 03 but now starts to
> > use c++11 features.
> 4. Drop this part entirely. If a library stops working in C++03 mode,
> it stops working. Users can contact the library maintainer and ask for
> them to support C++03. If Boost.X fails in C++03 mode because it
> depends on Boost.Y, the users don't need to care that the reason it
> fails is because of Boost.Y, their point of contact is Boost.X's
> library maintainer.
I somehow felt this is important, but I don't remember why just now.
> > Obviously, this change will only effect libraries that have supported c++03
> > before. Libraries that already supported compilers and/or newer language
> > versions are unaffected.
> 5. This seems obvious and not worth mentioning, but up to you.
I also wasn't sure about that. I didn't want to give the impression
that from now on every boost library would start to support c++11
> > If you want to continue to use boost in a project that has to stay compatible with
> > c++03, recommendation is to stick to the last release before the switch
> > (probably 1.72).
> 6. Drop this part too. Users who want to be on latest Boost because
> they use Boost.X C++11+ library and Boost.Y C++03-compatible library
> should feel equally encouraged to do.
Fine with me
> > [add some more fluff?]
> 7. Same as #1. No fluff.
Again, please someone else take the lead on the actual writing, as I won't be able to work on this during the next week
or so (no access to a computer) a.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk