Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alexander Grund (alexander.grund_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-12-16 07:51:29

Am 15.12.20 um 18:12 schrieb Edward Diener via Boost:
> Obviously we can also add "cxxstd": "03" for the many Boost libraries
> which can still be used at the C++98/C++03 compilation level also,
> even though I would argue that not having a "cxxstd" json field should
> mean C++98/C++03 by default.

I would not treat a missing cxxstd as "C++03" because that makes the
proposal mostly useless: Your goal was to tell end users whether they
can use the library given their std level. Now you treat libraries with
missing information as "compatible with everything" so end users will
become confused and annoyed and will ultimately not use this. I'd hence
make it explicit and never assume.

BTW: This will ultimately end up at (e.g.), won't it? Or where would that be

If so the field "Standard" should be clarified. I'm not sure what it
means here and it often is empty (which I'd simply remove)

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