From: Brey, Edward D (EdwardDBrey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-06 10:11:24
> From: Peter Dimov [mailto:pdimov_at_[hidden]]
> From: "Brey, Edward D" <EdwardDBrey_at_[hidden]>
> > The key to minimizing recompilations (on environments with
> > headers) is grouping classes into families such that
> classes in the family
> > tend to change together and programs that use a class in
> the family are
> > likely to already be using the family (a form of locality
> of reference).
> > This sounds a lot like the concept of modules in other languages.
> OK, but who gets to determine that grouping? If I supply you
> with the five
> smart pointer headers you are free to group them in any way you need,
> including the "no grouping" option if you don't use
> precompiled headers
> (some of us don't.) Nothing prevents you from precompiling
> all of them.
True, fine granularity give you complete flexability. There is no magic
behind predefined groupings of classes. It is simply a matter of utility
and a means to save the programmer time, just as is the purpose of the
library as a whole. Just as there is value to letting users who need
granularity have granularity, there is value to being able to drop a "smart
pointer module" into a pch and forget about it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk