From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-16 14:54:43
At 01:10 PM 12/16/2002, Peter Dimov wrote:
>From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
>> At 11:15 AM 12/16/2002, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> >Sounds good. I think we should try to do the conversion
>> >least for all files in subdirectories (e.g., the file
>> >would be assumed to be a part of library xxx if libs/xxx exists) and
>> >files boost/xxx.hpp where there is a library in libs/xxx. We don't
>> >to do this conversion by hand :)
>> Good point! I'll whack together a little program to do the above (after
>> waiting awhile to make sure such a change is acceptable to others.)
>I agree with the general intent of the proposal (in fact I've been using
>direct links to the .html file with the documentation for some time now)
I've also been doing that too in my non-Boost code for several years.
Originally I had an IDE plugin to invoke a web browser when clicked, but of
course program editors now have that as a builtin feature. Works great.
>but how does this affect (implementation detail) headers that aren't
>necessarily part of a specific library?
>boost/assert.hpp, boost/throw_exception.hpp, for example.
Good question. It seems to me every header should have a home
library. Probably "utility" for your examples.
If "utility" accumulates several entries in a given category, as has
already happened with iterators-related stuff, we should then move those
components to their own library.
Note that while I agree with Doug that it would be easier to initially set
up as many files as possible automatically, that is just a labor saving
initialization. It isn't meant to override Boost developer wishes.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk