On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:09 PM Robert Ramey wrote:
On 11/7/19 2:27 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
What is being proposed is a sanctioned mechanism for library maintainers to drop C++03 in an orderly manner. Any library maintainer who wishes to maintain C++03 support is free to do so.
I don't see any difference between this and the current policy. As far as I know no library developer has ever been required to provide support for other than the current standard. Of course if I'm wrong about this, then feel free to make this policy explicit. I don't see it changing anything.
It's different in this way: Some Boost authors and contributors do feel constrained even if the official policy is to support only the latest/current standard from breaking either an existing Boost library that depends on that library that supports C++03, or breaking some software that uses that Boost library which must be compiled in C++03. For example, during a Boost beta release, reports might come in from users saying that X library no longer works for them because they need C++03 support. Or after a release, a Linux distribution package set fails to build, because they compile those programs in C++03 mode, and the Boost library stops compiling in C++03 mode. But while that might have been the case three - maybe even two - years ago, it isn't likely to be the case now. e.g. More compilers default standard mode is C++14 now, not C++03. i.e. Those of us who were worried about that outcome are less worried about it now. Glen