Re: [boost] Development and Release Practices

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-08 09:15:38

on Wed Aug 08 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:

>>> I've used 'dependee', but I'm not sure if it's correct English.
>> 
>> No according to me - and as I'm really English English, I should know ;¬))
>> 
>> I don't think there is an existing word, surprisingly.
>> 
>> I am the provider for my dependents, but that too isn't quite the right word?
>> It doesn't quite imply that I really am depended on?
>
> I still fail to see the problem. What is wrong with 'prerequisite' ?
> The entry in http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prerequisite makes it
> look quite suitable.

There's a subtle temporal aspect ("pre") that I don't think we want to
communicate.

Actually I don't like either "prerequisite" or "dependency" all that
much, because both imply that the prerequisite/dependency library
isn't useful on its own ("it's just a prerequisite for the rest of
Boost").  I think, unless we're talking explicitly about a
relationship between two libraries, I prefer "core" or "base" or
something simple like Beman chose initially, which distinguishes the
libraries' role without implying any relationship to the other
libraries.

We can still use that relationship as a criterion for choosing core
libraries.

backpedaling-ly y'rs,
dave

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com
The Astoria Seminar ==> http://www.astoriaseminar.com