[chipdart]

> It's not a show stopper though since everyone should have a c++11 compiler now (...)

I think the point of pointing out it's C++11 is that it's not "classic C++" as it's using "modern C++" features. Thus it's a mystery why it would be referred to as classic C++.

[jart]

Just because I included an rvalue constructor doesn't make it C++11. This library was originally written in C. It hasn't changed a whole lot since Gautham and I originally wrote it: https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/blob/master/tool/net/lj... I feel perfectly comfortable calling C++11 "classic" or even "baroque" compared to what people are doing with C++ in 2024. However if you disagree with me, and feel that classic means C++03, then I've made certain that your preferences are supported by this library too. Just remove the rvalue and nullptr_t constructors. I'll probably add #ifdefs soon to automate that too.

[chipdart]

> Just because I included an rvalue constructor doesn't make it C++11.

Actually, it does. I mean, does it compile when you pass -std=c++98?

> This library was originally written in C.

Doesn't matter. If it uses C++11 features, it's C++11.

> I feel perfectly comfortable calling C++11 "classic" or even "baroque" compared to what people are doing with C++ in 2024.

Irrelevant. You can go the Humpty Dumpty way as far as you want to go and call anything any way. It doesn't matter. If you use C++11 features, it's C++11. If it's C++11 then you're discussing modern C++. You don't need to use all bells and whistles to quality.