On 1/6/2021 2:41 PM, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 1:34 PM Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 1/6/2021 2:00 PM, Donovan Dikaio via Boost wrote:
The updates to show "C++ standard minimum level" is just live here: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/master/
Excellent !
Ideally if there is no 'cxxstd' json value, I think the "C++ standard minimum level" should say '03' rather than be left out completely. This will be incorrect for those libraries who have not yet merged the 'development' branch change for 'cxxstd' into 'master' yet. But once these libraries merge the change into their 'master' branch the correct "C++ standard minimum level" would then be shown for all libraries, and all libraries would have a "C++ standard minimum level" displayed, which I think is more consistent with what end-users would want to see.
Please do not do this. It would subvert the possible intent of libraries that do not wish to peg themselves at a particular C++ level. It would also likely show incorrrect information for the libraries that could be C++98 and have not gotten around to adding this field to reflect it as such.
If an end-user does not see a "C++ standard minimum level" for a library in the documentation what should he/she assume ? I would like to argue that it would be beneficial for end-users to see the C++ standard minimum level for all libraries, even for those which work at the C++98/03 level on up. I do not understand the purpose of a library which does not wish to peg itself at a particular minimum C++ level. A library could have 25 pieces of functionality, 5 of which work at the C++03 level, 5 of which work at the C++11 level, 5 of which work at the C++14 level, 5 of which work at the C++17 level, and 5 of which work at the C++20 level, but how likely is that and what good does it do to represent such a library as not having any C++ standard minimum level ? Specifying a C++ standard minimum level does not mean that there is not functionality in a library which might require a higher C++ standard level in order to work properly. We are just trying to give end-users an idea of the minimum C++ standard level needed to work with the majority of functionality in a Boost library. In particular specifying a C++ standard minimum level of '03' does not mean that there might be some functionality in the library which requires C++11 ( or higher ).