Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Modularizing Boost libraries with sublibs
From: Daniel Pfeifer (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-09 14:22:35
2012/12/9 Marshall Clow <mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
> 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]>
> >> While adding Boost.ODEint to the modularization manifest, I realized
> >> inconsistencies about sublibs.
> >> The directories in "libs" usually contain one library each. In this
> >> we move the content to a dedicated Git repository. Some directories
> >> (algorithm, numeric) host multiple libraries. How should we treat them?
> >> Move each one to a dedicated Git repository, or leave them grouped
> >> What's currently inconsistent, is that "numeric" is split into
> >> repositories, while "algorithm" is not.
> > Size is at least one objective difference between "numeric" and
> > "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.
> >> Opinions?
> > 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.
By disappear, you mean "move somewhere else" or "not be seen as sublibs any
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk