Re: improve <boost/config.hpp>

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-03-07 18:32:38

John Maddock wrote:
> > Please see: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/feature_test for
> > language level macros -- look for _cpp_constexpr.  I believe you'll
> > discover that every combination you're looking for going back to cxx
> > 2011 is represented
> > -- basically making a boost config macro extraneous.  The standard
> > copied this idea from boost.config btw and it's quite powerful for
> > portable libraries.  Note that I regret using the boost.config macro
> > for date-time constexpr stuff, because at this point I'd like to make
> > the library available in a stand-alone fashion like boost.math.  Not
> > depending on boost.config would be helpful in that endeavor.
> 
> I think that would be fairly trivial Jeff: I see nothing in date_time that requires
> something beyond C++11, so you could probably just check for Boost.Config's
> presence with __has_include and only include it when available.  Otherwise
> assume a conforming C++11 compiler in standalone mode.

Or just require C++11 and do nothing at all.