On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 4:44 PM Edward Diener wrote:
On 11/29/2020 10:47 AM, Mike via Boost wrote:
Gesendet: Samstag, 28. November 2020 um 18:32 Uhr Von: "Edward Diener via Boost"
I think this is valid. But you are certainly allowed to create a PR for a Boost library which changes its use of a Boost type to its C++ standard library equivalent, with the proviso that the Boost library's base C++ level be C++11 and not C++03. The latter should not be an issue since Boost has already stated that Boost officially supports C++11 on up.
Aside from the fact that things like std::stng_view, std::byte or std::memory_resource aren't c++11, but c++17: Could you point me to this statement?
What statement ? Boost doesn't officially support C++03, even if individual libraries still support C++03, so a PR that changes a library that currently supports C++03 as its base level to instead support C++11 as its base level by using C++11 standard libraries in its code instead of the Boost equivalent libraries, would not be a radical change. Of course it is still up to the maintainer(s) of the library to accept the PR. As for changing a library's base level to C++14, C++17, or C++20 via a PR that probably needs to be justified since it would remove that library's usefulness for those compiling at the C++11 level.
Note that for new libraries being accepted into Boost, the only requirement is that (at the time of review) they compile with at least two C++ compilers and that they at least compile under the current C++ standard (which today is C++17). i.e. We accept new libraries that don't compile under C++11, and we even have some libraries today that require C++14 or higher. Glen