Re: [boost] [system][chrono] header-only libs

Subject: Re: [boost] [system][chrono] header-only libs
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-06 16:22:01

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>> Vicente Botet's header-only option for Boost.System is mostly working,
>> and will be ready to commit to trunk soon.
>
> Cool
>

+1

>> One question I'd like feedback on. The proposed macro that enables
>> header-only configuration is BOOST_SYSTEM_INLINED, but
>> BOOST_SYSTEM_HEADER_ONLY seems clearer to me.
>
> "HEADER_ONLY" is clearer.
>

+1

> Given that most Boost libraries are header only, it seems as if those that provide an option to deviate from that norm, should do so explicitly. Â Thus, the name and behavior should be reversed: Â BOOST_XXXXX_AS_LIBRARY.
>

Right, but unfortunately for Boost.System's case, the default usage
has been as a library, therefore an option should be explicitly turned
on to deviate from its default distribution/usage scenario.

Although it is possible to turn on BOOST_XXX_AS_LIBRARY by default in
libraries that do distribute themselves as linked-in libraries and
just have an option to turn it off at compile-time (which is actually
tricky to do at best), maybe providing the BOOST_XXX_AS_LIBRARY for
libraries that were once header-only to become
externally-built-and-linked-in would make a better choice.

HTH

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
about.me/deanberris