Boost logo

Boost :

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-01-25 21:36:00

On 25/01/2021 20:44, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:

> I offer all this up
> as a possibly valid reason why testing a Boost library on some other
> platform/architecture, other than the usual Intel x64 on
> Mac/Linux/Windows, is not going to be a big priority for any Boost
> library developer/maintainer.

I would take the view that over half of all computing devices where C++
is likely to run are ARM or AArch64.

Therefore one ought to be targeting one's code at those preferentially
to other architectures.

You're right that for high level libraries, C++ is generally very
portable. But for low level libraries, and any high level libraries
which depend on those low level libraries, there can be some _very_
nasty surprises e.g. ARM does not implement all of IEEE 754, and ARM is
strict about use of acquire-release atomics as well as alignment in a
way x64 is not.

Therefore, in my opinion, if your code works well on ARM, it's very
likely to work on x64. But the reverse is not true.


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