Github user jeking3 commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/1448#discussion_r173620082 --- Diff: build/cmake/DefineOptions.cmake --- @@ -91,11 +91,26 @@ if(WITH_CPP) option(WITH_STDTHREADS "Build with C++ std::thread support" OFF) CMAKE_DEPENDENT_OPTION(WITH_BOOSTTHREADS "Build with Boost threads support" OFF "NOT WITH_STDTHREADS;Boost_FOUND" OFF) + + set(WITH_CPP_SUPPORT OFF) --- End diff -- I think we would be better off testing for C++11 features and ensuring that if we find what we need, we can enable certain things. For example if we ask cmake to check for support of cxx_defaulted_functions then we can enable the boost-less noncopyable. One can typically check for cxx_nullptr in order to determine if there is smart pointer support, or write a custom check for std::shared_ptr detection. Relying on checking compiler versions is error-prone and not as portable. This is a good start to optionally eliminating boost from the C++ runtime library. I can work on the feature checks as an extension to this work.