On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 1:09 PM Matt Pulver via Boost
- Github: https://github.com/pulver/autodiff
Minor nit, your local git credentials are not configured correctly, that's why your commits are not attached to your GitHub account in your commit log (set `git config --global user.email` and `git config --global user.name` to match your GitHub login). https://github.com/pulver/autodiff/commits/master
- C++17 compiler that supports constexpr if statements. There are a fair amount of calculations done at compile-time which would require messy SFINAE hacks to make this C++14-compatible.
I know my position is unpopular, but I don't think this is a good tradeoff. Supporting C++11 certainly requires more work on the author's part but that is a finite investment. The return on this is a practically unbounded amount of utility, as the number of users is normally expected to greatly outnumber the amount of authors (1 in this case). In fact you could argue that there is infinite utility in laboring to produce "messy SFINAE hacks", because otherwise users of C++14 and C++11 cannot use the library at all. Most users only care that the library works, and are unaffected by the particulars of the sausage-making. In general, I feel like it is a good engineering practice for Boost libraries to only require C++14 or C++17 when absolutely necessary. In this case it does not seem necessary. This year's developer surveys indicate that C++11 has the most widespread use: https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2018/cpp/ https://isocpp.org/files/papers/CppDevSurvey-2018-02-summary.pdf It seems like doing the more verbose C++11-style SFINAE is worth it, to have access to the larger base of C++ users. This opinion is my own, and I will note that (roughly speaking) the Boost library policy does not currently mandate support for any specific versions of C++. Regards