In page 20 of ISO's 2022 Annual C++ Developer Survey "Lite", only 12.76% responded that they're not allowed to use C++17 in their current work/school project. Compare this to 2.4% for C++11.
Here is a snapshot of that table that I place here under the Fair Use Doctrine for the purposes of discussion.
In light of that survey, I'd like to migrate CppWAMP to C++17 for the v1.0.0 release that will feature router functionality. If there are any objections to C++17, please let me know and explain why.
I would avoid the features of C++17 that have poor support from compilers, in particular from_chars and to_chars where I would provide a macro to enable/disable their use. cppreference has this nice table that summarizes C++17 feature support by compiler.
In page 20 of ISO's 2022 Annual C++ Developer Survey "Lite", only 12.76% responded that they're not allowed to use C++17 in their current work/school project. Compare this to 2.4% for C++11.
Here is a snapshot of that table that I place here under the Fair Use Doctrine for the purposes of discussion.
In light of that survey, I'd like to migrate CppWAMP to C++17 for the v1.0.0 release that will feature router functionality. If there are any objections to C++17, please let me know and explain why.
I would avoid the features of C++17 that have poor support from compilers, in particular
from_charsandto_charswhere I would provide a macro to enable/disable their use. cppreference has this nice table that summarizes C++17 feature support by compiler.