From: Markus Werle (numerical.simulation_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-28 04:58:12
Eric Friedman wrote:
> Maybe a different way to understand my argument: why isn't MPL mentioned
> even *once* in the Type Traits documentation?
Probably because mpl is new and only few have recognized
that using boost::mpl will be the canonical way for any
compile time calculation, like using STL is it for for the runtime part ...
> Maybe it's because no one has gotten around to updating the docs. But I
> believe its because the two are not and should not be related on a
> conceptual level.
I recently thought about the library coupling problem
in boost, because it has become so large and you often
hear people say that they only need this and that and
hate to install 47Megs + binaries at their customers machine.
(Btw: has boost::build a partial-build feature?)
I came to the conclusion that the coupling between
boost libs is not a problem, since boost is not large
but small: I "live" on a 5 GB Linux world and some extra
lib like boost makes no difference, especially when looking
at actual hard disk prices and compared to KDE or IE
You could define different levels of - well how should
I call it? - coreness in boost:
Range goes from some bare metal basic feature like type_traits
to elaborated end user software like boost::spirit and
boost::python, but again I feel like such a distiction
is often difficult. It is all designed for reuse.
A tight coupling of the core libraries should
Since boost::mpl is designed as a core library, we can
conclude that type traits can (and should) reuse it
and vice versa.
-- Build your own Expression Template Library with Daixtrose! Visit http://daixtrose.sourceforge.net/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk