Re: Dropping C++03 support (again)

From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-02-05 21:04:15

niedz., 5 lut 2023 o 19:02 Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
napisał(a):

> Robert Ramey wrote:
> > Right.
> >
> > I think the wording is confusing here.  The proposal is not to drop 03
> support -
>
> That is exactly the proposal.
>
> > whatever that means.  The proposal is to deprecate and remove a few older
> > boost libraries which some library and user code might depend.
>
> No, the proposal is not to deprecate and remove Boost libraries.
>

Let me do a small exercise to check if I understood what is being proposed.
The following sentences were *not* said by Peter. I am making these claims,
based on my understanding, and I would ask you, Peter, to say if they are
correct in the context of the proposal.

Suppose that 1.83 is the first release where the proposal is implemented.

1. This means that the author of library Boost.X can declare "support for
C++03 is deprecated, and it will be removed in 1.85". In 1.85 the author is
allowed to make changes such that when library Boost.X is compiled with
-std=C++03 a hard error is issued. This means that if library Boost.Y uses
(or depends on) Boost.X and library Boost.Z depends on Boost.Y and The
author of Boost.Z claims that they support C++03, this support suddenly
breaks in library Boost.Z (because library Boost.X now issues an error on
-std=C++03).

2. The implication of the above is that only the "leaf libraries" (those
that no other Boost library depends on) can safely remove the C++03 support.

Are the above statements correct?

Regards,
&rzej;