Subject: Re: [boost] directory structure
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-11-15 09:20:19
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Mario Mulansky <mario.mulansky_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 1) I think sub-libraries work best when they're related mini-libraries:
>> utility is a good example.
>> 2) Personally I find extra long include paths a pain, especially if
>> boost/mylib is already subdivided.
>> So I would prefer larger standalone lib's to go directly in boost/mylib and
>> smaller mini-libs either under the banner of an existing lib, or under a
>> subcategory such as boost/utility.
> Ok following this argument we should release odeint also directly in
> boost/odeint and not (as is now) boost/numeric/odeint.
> It doesnt matter too much to me, although some consistency would be nice, I
Simplicity is nice too. What's gained from boost/numeric/odeint?
boost/odeint is shorter and simpler.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk