On 8 February 2018 at 15:06, Peter Dimov via Boost
So mp11 and Beast need to be C++17 because those using C++11 can always use an earlier version of Boost.
No, no, no, f.e. boost::mp11, or boost::beast are to be compiled with C++11 and should therefor use std C++11 libraries instead of their equivalent boost version... (as boost::mp11 does, as far as I've seen, but you're far better placed to say something about that than me, I would say). Boost-1.66 source code plus the stuff that is generated building boost (just x64, debug, release) occupies very close to 5GB of disk-space, time to start cutting that down. But if your using gcc-3.3, clang-3.6 or vs2012, one cannot expect boost -1.67 to compile with it. On windows, I would say this is more of an issue as on linux, as you'd be obliged to use/install old crt's, that are known to have (publicized) vulnerabilities... I have an issue with boost looking backwards all the time. Clang and VC (we've got (experimentally) concepts!) both seem to have (nowadays) adopted very much a forward looking view, to be ahead of the standard. I would like boost to do the same. I'm talking about std::random (boost version deviates), std::chrono (not sure whether boost version deviates), std::file_system (boost version deviates), etc... degski