From: brass goowy (brass_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-29 18:55:03
Ulrich Eckhardt writes:
>The very simple reason is simplicity.
>* Even on a system where I don't have admin access, I can easily download and
>compile against Boost, without having to first compile shared/static libs or
>having to modify paths in order for the runtime linker to find DLLs.
>* Even if I had admin access, I would still be reluctant to installing Boost's
>* When I'm testing different compiler settings trying to get another few
>percent of performance, I don't have to compile another Boost version for
>each compiler setting.
I think you have to rebuild the compile_inplace.cpp file each time you want to
test a different compiler setting. I don't find an advantage to what you
>* I don't have to know which library to link to, which lowers entry barriers
>for new Boost users.
>* I can easily compile and distribute programs without having to worry about
>required shared libraries.
That would be helpful. The Ebenezer approach already has that.
"Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth, may Israel now say: Many a
time have they afflicted me from my youth: yet they have not prevailed against me."
Psalm 129: 1,2
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk