On 27 April 2018 at 11:18, Hans Dembinski wrote:

...

On 27. Apr 2018, at 11:00, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

Since each Boost library seems/is free to decide about which C++ standard they require, would it be useful to start tagging each library with standard in the release notes and docs?

Perhaps new "by by C++ standard" listing could be added in here https://www.boost.org/libs/

Sounds like a neat idea. A little label (C++14) etc after each library would work, like here http://en.cppreference.com/w/

Yes, indeed. Some libraries also mention C++XY in description in libs/{library}/meta/libraries.json Could this detail be moved to a dedicated JSON property, eg. "std": "C++11" or similar? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

On 27 April 2018 at 12:04, degski via Boost wrote:

On 27 April 2018 at 11:00, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

...

Since each Boost library seems/is free to decide about which C++ standard they require, would it be useful to start tagging each library with standard in the release notes and docs?

Isn't the main (practical) problem, that compliance [of a compiler] with a certain standard is often in-complete and/or somehow broken.

From a library end-user point of view, I don't really care if a library or compiler actually religiously complies or not - I'm not interested in trying out compilers and figuring out if the library+compiler marriage will collapse at me or not.

I however do care to know what author/maintainer aims for, to be displayed with sign saying spoeak C++14+ or f...ff :)

And with the current pace of C++ standards, this will continue to be the case, hence Boost.Config. This is not new and has been discussed on the list on various occasions.

As often, this seems to be another area here where better is enemy of good. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

On 27 April 2018 at 16:56, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:

On 4/27/18 2:00 AM, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

...

Since each Boost library seems/is free to decide about which C++ standard they require, would it be useful to start tagging each library with standard in the release notes and docs?

Perhaps new "by by C++ standard" listing could be added in here https://www.boost.org/libs/

What I would like to see is a page for each library similar to those maintained in the incubator: http://blincubator.com/alphabetically/. This would give one place have all the information about a library.

I assume you mean a page like this, eg. http://blincubator.com/bi_library/range-io/?gform_post_id=1315 It would be nice to have such library 'certificate'. However, I was aiming for simple yet very useful tag, something that I could help to get done myself. The fully-featured solution would be beyond my current capacity. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

On 27 April 2018 at 19:19, Stefan Seefeld via Boost wrote:

On 2018-04-27 11:39 AM, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

...

On 27 April 2018 at 16:56, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:

...

On 4/27/18 2:00 AM, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:

...

Since each Boost library seems/is free to decide about which C++ standard they require, would it be useful to start tagging each library with standard in the release notes and docs?

Perhaps new "by by C++ standard" listing could be added in herehttps://www.boost.org/libs/

What I would like to see is a page for each library similar to those maintained in the incubator:http://blincubator.com/alphabetically/. This would give one place have all the information about a library.

I assume you mean a page like this, eg. http://blincubator.com/bi_library/range-io/?gform_post_id=1315 It would be nice to have such library 'certificate'.

However, I was aiming for simple yet very useful tag, something that I could help to get done myself. The fully-featured solution would be beyond my current capacity.

We already have a mechanism that seems to offer the needed hook: each library has a "meta" file with certain metadata, so the info you are asking for could be easily added there.

Indeed, I mentioned the 'meta' in my respone to Hans' Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net