Subject: Re: [boost] The future and present of Boost
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-24 23:49:18
Edward Diener wrote:
> > If we up the minimum requirement
> What do you mean by the above ?
We announce that Boost has a minimum requirement of such and so, and will no
longer support platforms not meeting it starting with release 1.X.
> Suppose you made the minimum requirement C++11, what would you expect a
> library to do to meet that requirement ?
The library doesn't meet the minimum requirement, the compiler does. The
library may assume the minimum requirement.
As an example, if our minimum requirement implies a working std::function,
Boost.Test may use std::function in its interface and implementation,
unconditionally and without checking cxxstd or BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_FUNCTIONAL
or whatever else, and its maintainers can in good conscience accept pull
requests making use of other C++11 features whose availability is guaranteed
by the minimum requirement.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk