On 8 Oct 2025 19:49, Gennaro Prota via Boost wrote:
Hi,
while discussing a PR on GitHub (<https://github.com/boostorg/ static_string/pull/67>), we ran into the question of whether BOOST_STATIC_STRING_STANDALONE should still be supported. What's your take on it? Personally, I lean toward minimizing conditional compilation wherever possible. Also, the macro is used to avoid dependencies which are easily avoided anyway, so why not avoiding them unconditionally and have "standalone mode" as the only option?
How much does BOOST_STATIC_STRING_STANDALONE actually save, in terms of dependencies? Is it possible to achieve the same effect (or close to it) automatically, if the code is compiled in C++17 mode? FWIW, I'm not a user of static_string, but I wouldn't have a problem with removing the standalone mode. Especially if most of it was automatically achieved by default in C++17 mode.