Boost logo

Boost :

From: James Dennett (jdennett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-27 10:50:09

Sohail Somani wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of Daryle Walker
> I don't think Boost, are any part of it, should _require_ an install
> procedure. It should be possible for any user to just take the actual
> header and source files and use any build system s/he has.
> ----
> Sorry to interrupt but what do you mean here? Any non-trivial
> library of source code needs to be built.

Most non-trivial libraries do, yes.

> Something sufficiently
> complex will be tied to a build system.

That's the point under debate; most C or C++ systems consist of
a selection of header files and source files, which "just" need
to be compiled and linked with suitable compiler settings. That
can be done by various build systems, with a little effort, by
and large. In the past, when the Boost build systems have failed
in various odd ways, I've thrown together a quick Makefile for
pieces that I needed.

(Unfortunately the platform on which I currently do most of my
work -- Solaris, using Sun's compiler and standard library --
doesn't support much of Boost. Sun's support for boost seems
to be dependent on us being able to use a binary-incompatible
standard library implementation, which is not viable when needing
to link with third-party proprietary libraries.)

> You're not making any
> sense to me... Are you suggesting that all of boost source
> should be compiled by #include directives?!

My guess is that was not the suggestion.

-- James

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