From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-26 21:21:05
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vesa Karvonen" <vesa.karvonen_at_[hidden]>
> We (Housemarque, Inc. a small game developer) are seriously considering to
> start using Boost in production code. However, there are still a few
> in Boost that currently either prevent using it or make it unnecessarily
> hard or ugly.
> One of those issues is the design of <boost/config.hpp>.
> This is the "textbook" method of dealing with minor platform differences
> everyone seems to be using it.
<snip long preamble>
> In other words, it is possible to use the following file structure:
> I independently developed this technique from first principles in 1999 and
> we have been using this solution in our own libraries since then with good
> results. I recall observing that at least STLPort did something similar at
> some point.
Yes, we switched STLPort to something like that at my urging years ago. But
platform-specific configuration files are still #included from a central
file. While not as strictly isolated as the scheme you propose it is
slightly simpler for users and might be a good compromise for boost.
Anyway, your approach is the most correct one. The only question is whether
issues of backward compatibility and minor issues of usability mean that we
should do something else.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk