From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-20 19:33:03
On 12/8/04 3:23 AM, "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The proposed course of action is documented in:
> 1. Are there any objections?
Yes. I'm looking at:
Yeah, I think that's possible. So I'm going to:
1. put new header to boost/detail
2. put new source to libs/detail/utf
3. #include new source in program_options.
I don't think any #include to the "libs" directory is a good idea. It works
only if an expanded Boost archive stays as-is. If the sub-directories are
scattered, e.g. to meet Unix header placements, then the idea fails. I
think some existing code tries to #include "libs," that code should be
changed. This could be a further argument to finally move mandatory source
files to a distinct root-level directory.
> 2. Who does it? I can do it soon. Robert, what do you think?
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk