Boost logo

Boost :

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-27 05:25:21

As a user who put off using many Boost bits for too long,
for the reasons you say, and despite the discussion Dave A referenced,
perhaps I can just say that you do have to have the whole thing.

It takes while to download, clutters your disk, but once there,
the only thing a MS IDE project (for example) needs to do is
to add the top level Boost directory to the list of include locations.

It doesn't clutter or slow your build in any way because
only the bits needed are #included. Pretty Painless really.

Go for it.


Dr Paul A Bristow, hetp Chromatography
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, Cumbria
+44 1539 561830
Mobile +44 7714 33 02 04

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Maciej Sobczak
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 9:16 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Include only one Boost file
> Hi Boosters,
> In one of my projects I would like to use some utility to measure
> elapsed time for simple performance estimations. class timer is really
> straightforward and it is something that I usually rolled on my own.
> Today, to be trendy (;-)), I would like to just #include
> "boost/timer.hpp" in my project. The compilers I use can eat this file
> with a yawn, so I think it is enough to add the timer.hpp file to my
> project (leaving the copyright stuff intact, of course), put appropriate
> #include in my code and happily distribute the whole project.
> No, no, no...
> The timer.hpp #includes config.hpp and limits.hpp, which...
> Again - my compilers can eat the class timer without problems and I do
> not expect porting soon to some esoteric or more broken compilers.
> 1. Including the whole config/details/limits hierarchy in my little
> project is not justified (it would be bigger than the project itself).
> 2. Asking my users to download the whole Boost so that I can use one
> little simple timer class is not justified.
> 3. Writing code like:
> #define BOOST_NO_whatever_else_to_cut_the_includes
> #define BOOST_NO_...
> // and finally:
> #include "timer.hpp"
> is not justified (or is it?).
> I understand the need for all those configs/details/limits and so on,
> but portability to everything is not my concern here and my project is
> supposed to be as simple as possible.
> A question to you, Boosters, is: Should I roll my own 10-lines timer
> class (it is a challenging question, I know ;-))?
> The same question could be asked about any other small class in Boost:
> how to pick some really small thing from Boost without inducing the
> chain of includes?
> The other possiblity is to take the timer.hpp file and *change* it
> deliberately, writing few lines of comment around.
> What do you think?
> What do you do?
> Is it considered a problem?
> Would it be justified to make some minimal version of Boost (or at least
> some part of it) for decent compilers? (kidding)
> I know that once the whole Boost gets included in C++0x (:-)), the
> problem will vanish - today nobody cares about the dependencies between
> standard headers - but at the moment it bothers me a bit.
> Regards,
> Maciej Sobczak
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

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