From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-26 18:25:42
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Tom Brinkman <reportbase_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Its probably more a UNIX thing, I'm not sure if windows developers
> could care one way or another.
For the record, I use Solaris 10, Linux (ubuntu Gutsy), and Windows w/ vc8.
But on LINUX/UNIX, there is a central repository of pre-built
> libraries that we syncronize our
> builds against.
Synchronize builds? Not sure exactly what you mean.
> Uncecessarily adding new libraries makes the process
> that much more to manage.
Are you referring to the extra work it takes to build the boost libs for
each supported os+compiler, and add them to your "repository" of 3rd party
> Compilers are very smart and very fast, and thats how I pefer to code.
Compilers are indeed smart and fast. And it still takes a non-zero amount
of time to compile the boost.FileSystem code. I still prefer to compile
that once up front, and not tack that on to every successive build of my own
code that I do. It takes a couple of hours to do a full rebuild of the code
base that I work on. I prefer shaving anything off that I can.
If a library is entirely inlined or template code, then it makes perfect
sense to make the library header only. It also strikes me as silly to force
a particular library to be something that its not.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk