Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Modularizing Boost libraries with sublibs
From: Marshall Clow (mclow.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-09 13:24:38
On Dec 9, 2012, at 8:50 AM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Daniel Pfeifer <daniel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> While adding Boost.ODEint to the modularization manifest, I realized some
>> inconsistencies about sublibs.
>> The directories in "libs" usually contain one library each. In this case,
>> we move the content to a dedicated Git repository. Some directories however
>> (algorithm, numeric) host multiple libraries. How should we treat them?
>> Move each one to a dedicated Git repository, or leave them grouped together?
>> What's currently inconsistent, is that "numeric" is split into individual
>> repositories, while "algorithm" is not.
> Size is at least one objective difference between "numeric" and "algorithm".
> "boost/numeric" is 210 Files, 30 Folders, and 3,094,931 bytes.
> "boost/algorithm" is 70 Files, 6 Folders, and 487,109 bytes.
>> Further, I saw that the Git submodules of numeric's sublibraries are
>> generated in "libs" rather than "libs/numeric", which is wrong. However,
>> before I fix it, we need to decide whether these individual submodules
>> should be individual or not.
> Unless someone comes up with a killer argument to do otherwise, I'd
> say numeric stays separate submodules and algorithms stays as a single
> sub-module. I agree with you that the numeric sub-libraries should be
> in libs/numeric.
The sub-libraries in Boost.Algorithm are a historical artifact, not something that was designed.
In an ideal world (i.e, one where I have CFT), the separate sub-libraries in Boost.Algorithm would disappear, leaving a single Boost.Algorithm library in its' place.
Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait).
-- Yu Suzuki