Subject: Re: [boost] [Modularization] A new approach to header modularization
From: Christopher Jefferson (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-28 18:34:44
On 28 May 2009, at 22:45, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Daniel James <daniel_james_at_[hidden]
> > wrote:
>> Although, you can add me to the people who are currently happy enough
>> with the status quo.
> Me too, I don't understand what would this reorganization improve.
> What would make sense for me personally would be an effort to reduce
> physical coupling in Boost, by moving as much code as possible from
> headers to CPP files.
Out of interest, how would this help? The majority of libraries make
no attempt to maintain a stable API from version to version, so the
only gain I could see would be reduced compile time. Useful yes, but
not obvious helping maintence? Also, so many (all?) libraries use
templates, which won't go into cpp files.