What should we do about Boost-style "concept checks"?

[Ville Voutilainen]

On Wed, 21 May 2025 at 15:00, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:

> However, even if we decide to go in this direction, there would be a
> lot of work to audit all the existing uses of
> __glibcxx_function_requires and __glibcxx_class_requires[1234] to
> check if the requirements need to be updated for C++11 and later. At
> the very least, most uses of _CopyConstructible and _SGIAssignable
> need to be checked to see if they should be relaxed to support
> move-only types.

I would rather entertain nuking the legacy ones, introducing new ones
where needed, and macro-backporting
those where reasonable - rather than modernizing the legacy ones.