Re: [boost] "libraries", names and directory structure

From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-29 14:37:21

--- David Abrahams <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gennaro Prota" <gennaro_prota_at_[hidden]>
> 
> > To me it seems that the current criterion is to put
> > among the utilities things that are "too small" to be
> > considered something autonomous. Is it actually so?
> 
> Roughly speaking, yes.
> 

Oh :) This seemed quite natural to me, until I decided to take a look
at boost's addressof. Even though I knew that it was a very short
template (something like that, but less rigorous, was provided by John
Potter almost one year and half ago on comp.lang.c++.moderated) I
wrote:

#include <boost/addressof/addressof.hpp>

Ok, I should have looked at the documentation but this made me think if
the current choice is actually so judicious. One issue for all: what if
something that appear "small" from the user perspective has a very
tricky and longish implementation? (or viceversa, but that's not often
the case with C++ ;)).

Of course, if you all think these are trifles I'll stop here :)

Genny.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com