From: Jeff Garland (azswdude_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-29 16:03:31
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:48 AM Mike via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
>
> But there are imho very reasonable reasons why people ask for a version
> of boost that makes use of c++XX beyond "because it is cool".
>
I can give you a very concrete one -- from_iso_string in date_time. It's
signature takes a const std::string&. If I have an std::string_view, then
I have to unnecessarily construct a string to call this function -- which
harms performance and is ugly. The bit of good news here is that it's easy
to change the signature for c++17 and up to just take string_view (that
covers string too) -- well after some code rewrite and by adding macro
hackery. But then the issue might be, should I support boost string_view
in older versions and add more macros so I'm not including extra stuff.
The combinatorics of supporting all the options can grow quickly.