From: Vesa Karvonen (vesa.karvonen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-09 07:04:04
I like the proposal, because it conforms to the ISP principle. I think that
there are (too) many libraries in Boost (and in the C++ standard library) that
generally do not conform to the ISP principle and therefore impose unnecessary
dependencies and unnecessarily, and significantly, increase compiling times of
applications. It is a typical trend in software to start with an ad hoc
solution and refactor it later.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 20:58
Subject: RE: [boost] Coding guidelines - noncopyable
> At 11:44 PM 7/7/2001, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> >Hmm.. here is a link to the proposed update to the library -
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/utility/. Basically, the new
> >directory structure looks like this:
> >and the documentation and examples were updated to reflect these changes.
> >IMO, if we agree with these changes, cost of including
> >'boost/utility/noncopyable.hpp' header would become a non-issue.
> I think Aleksey's proposal should be accepted.
> What do others think?
> Info: http://www.boost.org Unsubscribe:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk