|
Boost : |
From: Jeff Garland (azswdude_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-03-08 14:52:51
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 11:14â¯AM John Maddock via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> 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.
>
> Thanks John. date-time is currently compatible back to 1998 currently.
The constexpr macros from config allow that to happen by removing constexpr
when less than c++14 (the limitations of c++11 constexpr were too much to
practically support it). But yeah, I agree requiring 14 (and maybe 17 for
from_chars support) or above should make standalone date-time relatively
easy. I'd actually just like to remove as much of the macro hackery once
and for all.
Jeff
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk