Re: Boost website changes and .'cxxstd'

From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-01-12 03:10:53

On 1/11/2021 8:50 PM, Louis Tatta via Boost wrote:
> Hi Edward,
> 
> Donovan has updated the website:
> Remove 'Standard' field from each library info
> Remove 'Standard Proposals' and 'TR1 libraries' from sort categories
> Add 'C++ Minimum' to sort categories
> 
> Please let me know if you want any other changes.

When you sort by 'C++ Minimum' those libraries which have the same 
cxxstd value ( or no cxxstd value ) should be secondarily sorted 
alphabetically.

Other people seem to have wanted to bike-shed the "C++ Standard Minimum 
Level" line to something shorter, maybe even just "C++ Minimum" itself. 
I have personally no great preference other than wanting programmers to 
understand that the value given means the library supports that C++ 
standard level on up rather than supporting only that C++ standard level 
and nothing higher. I know assuming the latter would be foolish, but 
programmers have been known to become confused on a lot less.

Thanks for the great work !

> 
> Thank You
> Louis
> 
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 10:46 AM Edward Diener via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
>> On 1/7/2021 7:05 PM, Louis Tatta via Boost wrote:
>>> Hello Edward,
>>>
>>> I'm with the CPP Alliance.  I'm working with Donovan to implement the
>> Boost
>>> website changes and .'cxxstd'.
>>>
>>> Reading the messages on the boost mailing list, we see some changes
>>> requested and some asking not to implement the change. Can be a bit
>>> confusing on what is needed or wanted.
>>>
>>> Can we get a list of changes requested on the current implementation?
>>
>> The initial change has been done correctly, which is to provide a "C++
>> standard minimum level" display field for each library which has its
>> JSON field of "cxxstd" set to some value. I also have agreed with Peter
>> Dimov's remark, which was also suggested earlier in this thread, that
>> the "Standard" display field for each library should be removed, since
>> it's meaning is obsolete and now also confusing. I have also suggested
>> that if we are removing the "Standard" display field we should also
>> remove the "Standard Proposals" and "TR1 libraries" sort categories,
>> which are likewise obsolete.
>>
>> I personally think that since we now have a "C++ standard minimum level"
>> display field it would also be nice to be able to have a sort category
>> based on that display field called, let's say, "C++ Minimum".
>>
>>>
>>> Thank You
>>> Louis
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 6:16 PM Edward Diener via Boost <
>>> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/6/2021 5:44 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>>>>> Donovan Dikaio wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The updates to show "C++ standard minimum level" is just live here:
>>>>>> https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/master/
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at this, I think that we need to drop the "Standard" part. It's
>>>>> mostly empty, the places it says things like "TR1" aren't helpful, and
>>>>> it's easy to misinterpret it as the minimum required C++ level.
>>>>
>>>> I fully agree. Also the top line which give different views of the
>>>> library documentation can probably drop the "Standard Proposals" and
>>>> "TR1 libraries" views, since these are really obsolete by now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>>>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>