Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 16:14:34

Jeff Garland wrote:
> Why not just alternate releases -- so we'd have a 20 release and then a 17
> release, etc?

I have no idea how that's supposed to work.

> If we did pull this off, one interesting problem that would be induced is
> what various linux distros ship with...

Linux distros ship Boost built with the default gcc, with the default C++
standard. g++ defaults to C++03 before g++-6, to C++14 before g++-11. A
C++17 Boost will be unshippable for a while. C++14 is kind of acceptable

The other major consumer of pre-C++11 Boost are non-mainstream platforms
such as z/OS, where people are still stuck with C++03.

See e.g.

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