Re: [boost] Re: RFP: boost libraries

From: Noel Yap (yap_noel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-06 07:38:16

--- "Steve M. Robbins" <steven.robbins_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
> On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 10:13:28AM -0700, Noel Yap
> wrote:
> > --- "Steve M. Robbins"
> <steven.robbins_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> > > > Also, installation on Unix might want to
> change the
> > > > suffixes (or at least make it configurable for
> all
> > > > platforms).  Everything else sounds great.
> > > 
> > > Change the suffixes of what?
> > 
> > Change the suffixes of the header files.
> 
> You mean to change boost/utility.hpp to something
> else like
> boost/utility.h?  Pardon the pun, but I don't see
> the utility
> in that.
> 
> Indeed, that opens up two other cans of worms: (1)
> boost-using
> source code will no longer be portable, and (2)
> you'd have to
> also change the #includes of the header files.

If this is an option (in which the default is to leave
things alone) during installation, there shouldn't be
any problem.  In fact, this is how I install now.

Specifically, not only do the #includes have to be
changed, but anything that matches
"^#(define|include).*\.hpp" (I'm not sure if this
exact pattern is correct but you should get the idea).
 Currently, I blindly change all ".hpp" into ".h", but
that change can be too inclusive.

Anyway, something like this is more a luxury than a
necessity.  I shouldn't've mentioned it until we dealt
with the real issues at hand.

Noel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com