Boost logo

Boost :

From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-19 15:37:48

"Tobias Schwinger" <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> wrote

> > - it introduces unnecessary dependencies -- when a type is
> > this is reflected in the header that is used by the clients having
> > to do with this type.
> ^^^ Sorry, I don't understand this sentence. Would you elaborate, please?

If I have all the types registered in the same header, and
if I add a new type, then
this registration header needs to be modified to register the new type.

At this point I have to rebuild all the sources that use typeof on _any_

> Well, I guess we're going to go for #1 then.

Well, I just pointed out a few benefits of #1, but I am by no means sure
that it's perfect, and even the best of three...

> Where should the header go?
> boost/typeof/boost/<LIB>
> ??

No, definitely not under boost/typeof :-)

I think the registration should be [conceptualy] owned by the library
authors rather then typeof library, so I still think boost/<LIB>/typeof is
more appropriate. When I was talking about non-intrusiveness I meant files,
not directories. It is also much easier to work with CVS when everything is
under the same root.


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