Re: The new Boost 17.0.0

From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 23:40:56

On 11/29/2020 6:10 PM, Mike via Boost wrote:
>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 29. November 2020 um 22:43 Uhr
>> Von: "Edward Diener via Boost" <boost_at_[hidden]>
>>
>> On 11/29/2020 10:47 AM, Mike via Boost wrote:
>>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 28. November 2020 um 18:32 Uhr
>>>> Von: "Edward Diener via Boost" <boost_at_[hidden]>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/28/2020 11:47 AM, Mike via Boost wrote:
> 
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> - Obviously a c++03 lib can't use std::chrono::duration or std::string_view
>>>>>      in its interface. The former can sometimes be added as additional overload
>>>>>      if available, however, adding the latter almost certainly leads to ambiguous
>>>>>      overload resolution situations. So instead I have to convert the c++11/17/20
>>>>>      types into the appropriate boost types.
>>>>
>>>> I think this is valid. But you are certainly allowed to create a PR for
>>>> a Boost library which changes its use of a Boost type to its C++
>>>> standard library equivalent, with the proviso that the Boost library's
>>>> base C++ level be C++11 and not C++03. The latter should not be an issue
>>>> since Boost has already stated that Boost officially supports C++11 on
>>>> up.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>> Could you point me to this statement?
>>
>> What statement ?
> 
> Whatever you meant when you wrote:
> 
>> since Boost has already stated that Boost officially supports C++11 on up.

I recall something Peter Dimov wrote about Boost no longer guaranteeing 
support of code compiled at the C++03 level, but do not remember where 
it is on the website.