Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-15 04:21:14

Daryle Walker wrote:
> Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
>> John,
>> if you are going to refactor, probably you can follow the proposals
>> that circulated on the list, of supporting both approaches.
>> Basically, you can give an header that has only declarations, one
>> with (inline) definitions (inline can be controlled with preprocessor
>> macro), and a source file that will include the definitions with
>> disabled inlines.
>> In this way, everyone can choose whether to include the inline
>> definitions, or compile in its project the source file with
>> out-of-line versions of the functions.
>> I think that when one has the option of compiling the library using
>> his preferred build system, this need for header only library will
>> just disappear, and other considerations as compile times will weight
>> more.
> I'm un-dropping off the grid to mention that the Boost mandatory
> source files should be able to be directly incorporated into a user's
> build system. It's been possible in the past. Maybe we should
> suggest to Monotone to try that first.

That is, and will always be true for regex: as I'm tied of saying over and
over, it's "just a bunch of sources", no magic involved :-)


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