Re: Any objections to making C++14 the current baseline for Boost support and testing?

From: Bo Persson (bo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-05-08 10:37:00

On 2022-05-08 at 11:31, Christopher Kormanyos via Boost wrote:
>   >> Even though 14 has lotsof bug fixes, >> the only real key advanced featureis>> relaxed constexpr constraints >> and digit separators.
> I apologize for my perhaps unwisely chosen(or even wrong) wording.
> 
>> I'd say that polymorphic lambdas, lambda> capture initializers, return type deduction,> decltype(auto) are all more important> and really felt.
> ... And I do respect this comment.
> But I'm not quite ready to give upon eleven just yet...
> 
> Let's argue the controversial C++11/14baseline issue from a purely service-oriented,product-management point of view.
> Boost has a deep symbiosis with C++11and vice-versa. There are clients usingBoost with C++11.
> To drop C++11 from a product/servicepoint of view should only be allowed ifa viable option is provided --- freelyand easily obtained --- for those clientsusing Boost with C++11.
> So I would say, prove to the clients,prove to ourselves what this optionactually is. Which option will allowclients stuck on C++11 (maybe notby choice) to continue to use Boostwithout C++11 support?

It can also be argued that we might do some clients a disservice instead 
of a service.

If the new features are *that* useful for the library authors, would 
they not be equally useful for the clients' code?

By supporting old compilers and standards we let them procrastinate for 
another couple of years. Is that good? Or should we encourage them to 
move on? Perhaps a gentle push is all they need?

"New and improved" is often used in product-marketing. Why not here?

> One possibility comes to mind:Freeze at 1.80 if you need C++11,but I don't like this option.
> 
> Kind regards, Chris
> 
>