Boost logo

Boost :

From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-27 14:41:13


On 11/27/06 1:44 AM, "Sohail Somani" <s.somani_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of Daryle Walker
>
> I don't think Boost, are any part of it, should _require_ an install
> procedure. It should be possible for any user to just take the actual
> header and source files and use any build system s/he has.
>
> ----
>
> Sorry to interrupt but what do you mean here? Any non-trivial library of
> source code needs to be built. Something sufficiently complex will be tied to
> a build system.

I thought that Boost would be one of the exceptions; that a build system
wouldn't be mandatory. We have kept that ideal for the most part.

> You're not making any sense to me... Are you suggesting that
> all of boost source should be compiled by #include directives?! I must've
> missed some context in this discussion.

All the *.hpp headers would be compiled by #inclusion, of course. I meant
that any required *.cpp source files can be incorporated into a project
however the user wants, without being forced to use some sort of "officially
blessed" extra-lingual tool. (A non-Boost example would be the special
preprocessor Qt uses.) All the Boost tools should remain secondary to the
goals of providing C++ libraries. I don't want Boost.Python starting a
"slippery slope".

-- 
Daryle Walker
Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
darylew AT hotmail DOT com

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk