Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-11-26 17:10:04

Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
> >
> Perfectly fine with me/boost.test. *BUT* I see a lot of internal
> dependencies on boost.test and it looks to me that some of those libraries
> are not actively maintained.
> Would the CMT be taking care of that? Should the libraries be moved to
> boost.lightweighttest or should it be a copy of boost.test inside each of
> the libraries?

Good questions without easy answers. We've been slowly moving
undermaintained libraries to LWT where feasible, but there's still much work
to do. But the options, were Boost.Test to switch to requiring C++11, would
in general be either move to LWT, or drop C++03 in the dependent libraries
as well.

It's a bit more subtle than that though, because some libraries only use
parts of Boost.Test, such as

        from <libs/uuid/test/test_generators.cpp>
        from <libs/uuid/test/test_generators.cpp>


        from <libs/qvm/test/test_qvm.hpp>


        from <libs/property_map/test/compose_property_map_test.cpp>
        from <libs/property_map/test/dynamic_properties_test.cpp>
        from <libs/property_map/test/function_property_map_test.cpp>
        from <libs/property_map/test/transform_value_property_map_test.cpp>

So the amount of work will depend on whether some of these headers will
continue to be usable under C++03.

A major goal of my suggested policy is actually to answer this question for
library users; if the header starts issuing deprecation warnings, C++03
users of it would need to transition to something else. If it doesn't, they
wouldn't need to.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at