Re: [boost] C++03 / C++11 compatibility question for compiled libraries

On 2/9/2018 10:45 AM, Thomas Heller via Boost wrote:

Am 09.02.2018 4:21 nachm. schrieb "Edward Diener via Boost" < boost@lists.boost.org>:

On 2/9/2018 4:49 AM, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:

...

What do you propose to do with libraries that want to keep C++03

...

compatibility and rely on Boost.Test in tests?

Demand that they be upgraded or drop them in favour of better-behaved ones.

Only the future is ahead. The past is irrelevant.

A library that demands c++03 is not a c++ library. It’s merely a blocker to productivity. It must adapt or die.

Since C++03 is the lowest level of C++ standards compatibility, it can hardly "demand" anything. If you think it does please point out a C++03 construct which is not supported by later C++ standards.

std::auto_ptr.

OK, but That is a "library" rather than a language construct. I am all for C++03 libraries upgrading their implementation if a later version of C++ drops support for a previously supported standard library. I was one of the many people who worked to change a number of Boost libraries from using std::auto_ptr to using std::unique_ptr when it was appropriate. In general though, while I do encourage new library developers to use later versions of the C++ standard if they feel that it will make their library better, I do not see the purpose of dropping support for existing C++03 libraries that are successful in their goals. Nor do I see any purpose for mandating what level of C++ support any given library must meet to be part of Boost.

...

On 9 Feb 2018, at 09:45, Andrey Semashev via Boost

...

wrote:

On 02/09/18 12:13, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:

...

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Raffi Enficiaud via Boost wrote:

...

* is there any better option? All the other options I see are even worse.

Isn't it time to require C++11 to avoid spending / wasting time on these issues?

What do you propose to do with libraries that want to keep C++03 compatibility and rely on Boost.Test in tests?