Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Evolution
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-08 15:04:42

Hi Robert,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:46 PM
Subject: [boost] Boost Evolution

> Boost is getting bigger and bigger. This is a good thing.
> The Boost header directory and boost namespace is also getting bigger and
> bigger. This is starting to become a problem. I would like to see:
> a) new libraries not add headers to boost directory or namespace.
> - with the possible exception - of "convenience headers" which include all
> the other headers
> for a library.

> b) authors of existing libraries which are implemented in boost
> directory/namespace
> would be encouraged to migrate them to a lower level.

I agree with the directory, but not with the namespace. In particular I will see in the boost namespace every libary that is close to the standard, as for example Boost.Ratio.

> c) a couple of "catch all" namespaces/headers would be required such as
> "utility" for small libraries.

I don't like "catch all" in general, but I recognize that utility is a good place to catch all small libraries. Anyway, I'm surethat there are some small libraries in Boost that are not in utility.

> I'm somewhat confused about "detail". If it's an implemenation detail
> of a particular library it should be in that library.

+1, and I this that the name space should be prefixed by the name of the library as ratio::ratio_detail.

> If its a useful
> function
> which is shared by several libraries, it should be in something like:
> "unreviewed". And of course these should have thier test and documenations
> in the corresponding "lib" subdirectory.

I disagree here. If is is useful to others it should be proposed for review if it can not be integrated in an existing library. Otherwise it is up to the author that is using the detail part to maintain it, at least respect to the user of her/his library.

> As boost get's bigger and bigger, it gets harder and harder to install
> just a part of it. But installing just a part of it is what users need to
> become
> confident about it.

Why do we need to install part of Boost. Boost is a whole.

> I realize that we've been circling around this topic for a while, I just
> want
> to keep it alive.


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