Re: [gil] Phasing out support C++11 and switching to C++17

From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-10-27 16:53:38

On 10/27/2020 8:20 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> 
>> We are also considering, with Samuel, a less revolutionary approach:
>> deprecate specific compiler/version in case it does not support 
>> certain C++11 features properly or suffers from bugs.
>> For example, we may advertise dropping GCC 5 support due to issues 
>> similar to this https://github.com/boostorg/gil/pull/526
> 
> If you drop GCC 5, you can make the minimum requirement C++14, as it's 
> the default for GCC 6 and newer. (C++17 is default for GCC 11.)

I do not think that is a good argument for the minimum level of C++ a 
library decides to support. Programmers can always decide, if they wish, 
not to use the default level of a compiler. I do however see little 
wrong with dropping support for very old compiler releases when those 
releases do not implement correctly the minimum level of the C++ 
standard which a library targets.