Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?

Subject: Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?
From: Phil Endecott (spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-20 18:27:29

Artyom wrote:
> Boost has too many logic in header part of library, by meaning too much
> I mean painfully too much.
>
> I think that Boost should adopt as policy:
>
> 1) All implementation related code **should** be put in sources.
> 2) Any non-template based class should have opaque/d/pimpl pointer in its
>    body.

> I created a simple example of echo server written with Boost.Asio and 
> written with a small pimpl-wrapped Boost.Asio

I think that what you have done is the right solution - you, the end 
user, can wrap things in pimpls where you believe it is beneficial.  
It's fairly easy to convert a non-pimpl interface into a pimpl one, 
espcially if you need only a subset of it; on the other hand, it's 
impossible to convert a pimpl'd interface back into a non-pimpled one.

Phil.