Am 15.12.20 um 18:12 schrieb Edward Diener via Boost:
Obviously we can also add "cxxstd": "03" for the many Boost libraries which can still be used at the C++98/C++03 compilation level also, even though I would argue that not having a "cxxstd" json field should mean C++98/C++03 by default.
I would not treat a missing cxxstd as "C++03" because that makes the proposal mostly useless: Your goal was to tell end users whether they can use the library given their std level. Now you treat libraries with missing information as "compatible with everything" so end users will become confused and annoyed and will ultimately not use this. I'd hence make it explicit and never assume. BTW: This will ultimately end up at (e.g.) https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_75_0/, won't it? Or where would that be displayed? If so the field "Standard" should be clarified. I'm not sure what it means here and it often is empty (which I'd simply remove)