On Wednesday, 3 May 2023 11:15:19 PDT Marc Mutz via Development wrote: > That might be so, and I'm not Maurice or Vladimir, but if I was to > decide, I wouldn't commit my company to a roadmap that requires forward > binary compatibility from stdlib vendors without a written declaration > from each of them that this is a supported use-case.
That problem exists whether we use C++20 or not. If a library decides to break BC, they'll likely *break* it for all versions. I don't think a C++20 symbol in 2025 is more likely to get replaced/removed than a C++17 or C++98 one. Compiling with a new version of the library and running with an old one is not and has never been supported. No one is suggesting that. That's why I listed a few oldest minimum versions, so that anyone interested in creating binary builds could choose exactly those. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
