Subject: Re: [boost] New boost packaging suggestion for windows
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-05 00:06:09
troy d. straszheim wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:08 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>>> I'm hoping Troy can give us a public report on the modularization
>>> effort. Troy?
> I suppose a picture is worth a thousand words:
> Please stop reading now and look at that. Look for cycles and
> dependencies that don't seem to make sense.
I actually don't see /very/ much there that doesn't make sense.
I really don't see what the problem is. Maybe some refactoring
is in order, but I think that major refactoring is probably a waste
> Realize that if you took the dependencies of test binaries into
> account you'd just add more edges. I don't know how many more.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk