Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alisdair Meredith (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-06 09:19:53

Similar to my experience, or rather...

the containers work well as the headers named after the container is as easy an idiom you can find!

Likewise, the stream classes are fairly easy, although <iomanip> is always catching me out!

The algorithm/utility headers just somehow don't sink in as well, but I have enough handy reference material within arms' reach to locate the info if I need it. I certainly would not appreciate less granularity in the STL headers, especially when dealing with programmers who will write

#include <stl>
using namespace std;

at the first opportunity!


>>> witt_at_[hidden] 6 February 2002 14:05:36 >>>
On Wednesday 06 February 2002 01:57, you wrote:

I am quite astonished cause this is the exact opposite of what I am
experiencing in day to day work. I never heard anybody complaining about tof
 ine grained headers in stl, but there are frequent complaints about missing
forward decl's and the not so fine grained headers. Most people I talk to try
to have fine grained headers in their projects. I can't think of a reasonable
application for a behemoth like <boost>, <stl> or even <std>.

If it comes to teaching and ease of use the fine grained approach providesr
 eal benefits. To me it's no problem remembering to include a map if I use a
map(a one on one mapping really helps), problems arise if I have to remember
pair is in <utility> or auto_ptr is in <memory>.

That's just my personal opinion. I'd like to cast my vote for fine grainedh


For further information on Renault F1 visit our web site at This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please destroy and notify Renault F1 on +44 1608678000."


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at