Re: [boost] [config] Rethinking feature macros?

Andrey Semashev wrote:

I'm saying that having ~10 macros defined for g++-7 -std=c++17 is probably better than ~100 macros. And having ~10 (other) macros defined for g++-15 -std=c++22 is yet better than ~200.

You're refuting your own argument, because if g++-15 would need 200 positive macros compared to g++-7's 100, g++-7 would need 100 negative macros. There is no point in time at which both can do with 10. The good thing about positive macros is that an old compiler never needs maintenance. With negative macros you have to keep adding them to it.