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

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-12-06 16:00:18

On 12/6/24 18:48, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 7:33 AM Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
>> No, the public-facing design doesn't change. `BOOST_CXX14_CONSTEXPR` is
>> replaced by the less ugly `constexpr` and that's pretty much it.
> 
> My next question is for those individuals who proclaim that requiring C++14
> and later is ok. What is the specific rationale you used to determine
> whether the loss of users is worth the benefit of "BOOST_CXX14_CONSTEXPR
> replaced by the less ugly constexpr`?"

If you're addressing me, I've expressed my thoughts in my previous post:

https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/12/258515.php

I'm not proclaiming anything, and instead I'm saying that the decision
is on the authors. If the authors do not think that "replacing
BOOST_CXX14_CONSTEXPR with conspexpr" is worth the cost, then don't
require C++14, simple.