From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-02-06 16:14:52
Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > Yes, a compiler may support the constexpr keyword, but have problems
> > with complex uses. This is not a good criterion for banning it
> > Boost-wide, because "complex uses" vary. One library may not be able to
> support it, another might.
> >
> > If you insist on not considering msvc-14.0 a C++11 compiler for your
> > libraries, that's your right (and problem.) It has nothing to do with
> > whether it's considered a supported C++11 compiler for the purposes of the
> announcement.
>
> I don't see how this is helpful to the users of Boost, especially considering the
> heavy dependencies between individual libraries. As a user I want to know if
> the set of libraries that I would like to use (plus their transitive dependencies)
> are compatible with my compiler/version.
It should be clear how not declaring msvc-14.0 a non-C++11 compiler and
therefore unsupported by Boost 1.83.0+ is helpful for the users of msvc-14.0.