Re: The new Boost 17.0.0

From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 23:43:52

On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 6:41 PM Edward Diener  wrote:
>
> 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.

It's not an official statement and it's not on the Boost website.
It was a proposal, and hosted on Peter's github:
https://pdimov.github.io/articles/phasing_out_cxx03.html

Glen