Re: [hash2][review] Early review (due to holidays)

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-12-06 14:14:44

On 12/6/24 17:01, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Claudio DeSouza wrote:
>>>
>>> As I mentioned, we briefly considered requiring C++14 so that the
>>> latter isn't an issue, but the feedback on Slack was negative. People
>>> love C++11 for some reason or other. Either way, this still wouldn't
>>> have solved the GCC issue.
>>
>>
>> But is Slack representative of a broader C++ audience. It depends which
>> channel you asked at, because if you asked at #boost, you will have a biased
>> response in favour of C++11.
> 
> Well, we can ask here.
> 
> Do people care about C++11 support in Hash2? Would it be acceptable to
> impose a minimum requirement of C++14?

There has to be a cost/benefit analysis. That is, if C++14 is the
baseline, will that significantly affect the library design and
implementation? And what is the estimate of C++11-only user base that
will be cut off?

On the first question, library authors are probably the ones who can
comment. The second one is more difficult to answer, but I think someone
posted here survey results a while ago. Stock compiler versions in the
major OSes is another indication.

Personally, I'm fine with anything up to and including C++17.