From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-29 14:54:55
From: "Daryle Walker" <darylew_at_[hidden]>
> on 10/29/01 11:54 AM, Peter Dimov at pdimov_at_[hidden] wrote:
> > From: "Moore, Paul" <paul.moore_at_[hidden]>
[about refactoring rational to use dlw_gcd]
> >> If anyone is willing to take this on, that's fine by me. But I,
> >> don't see the advantage.
> > That's probably because there is none.
> > Reuse is not a goal in itself, it's a tool.
> I'm planning to use GCD and LCM for other libraries I'm writing, so these
> headers make GCD and LCM available without unnecessarily dragging the
> rational and/or pool libraries in.
Do not get me wrong. Obviously, if two boost libraries use a common
implementation detail, then this is a strong idication that it would be
My comment was specifically about an already written, tested, and working
library. There's no need to refactor it _unless_ this will improve
portability, compile times, or something else.
-- Peter Dimov Multi Media Ltd.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk