Boost logo

Boost :

From: rtsweng-sw_at_[hidden]
Date: 2008-08-22 11:34:23

>>>That would make it possible to easily separate the compilation of >>>boost classes (or at least their methods) from that of user-defined >>>classes. >> No, unfortunately, it wouldn't, because you have to pull in the >> definitions to use the template class, what you want is precompiled >> headers. >This is not exactly true. I already use such an approach in my own >developments. >The idea is to use concepts to make sure that the right member >functions are called inside a cpp file and therefore will be compiled >and usable everywhere.That would mean pulling in all related >implementation details... But only for one compilation unit (created >with that purpose in mind). Other compilation units would only have >access to template class definitions. For that matter, i personally >use the .h extension for template class definitions and .hpp for >template class method definitions (but that's only an example of what >could be done). >Note that i agree that it would also bring a readability benefit to >the source code. >Benoît This sounds exactly like what I am trying to do, I already split the declarations into .h files and the definitions into .hpp. Can you give a brief example of using a single .cpp file for compilation? Is this done like MSVC stdafx files? Thanks, Robert ________________________________

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