On 07/30/2012 04:52 PM, Barak Raveh wrote: > I had 2-3 years in mind :) quite an arbitrary figure though.
Right, this is how I chose the most recent versions of Boost to support originally. But it makes sense to agree on an "XX" as you suggest. I think 2 years is reasonable.
> It's just that flawed backward compatibility is usually not due to > amazing technological breakthroughs we cannot live with out, but > probably due to some package changing the name of function X to function > Y, or a few #include statements that need to be altered...
True, I think we can live without some fancy CXX11 features. More annoying is the lack of some Boost classes and Python modules (only very very recent versions of Python ship with the multiprocessing module, for example).
Ben