Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compiler requirements.
From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-04 07:08:52
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, at 12:56 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> On 08/04/2013 12:45 PM, Daniel James wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, at 12:27 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> >> Note that the libraries are all in an interdependent mesh. So attempting
> >> to use any one of them (not just the 'any' one of them :) ) results in
> >> requiring all of them.
> >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.ryppl.devel/9/focus=26
> > I tried deleting the unordered library from my repo and could still run
> > the any tests just fine. So unordered's compiler requirements don't
> > affect boost::any's at all, even though it's in your list. Module
> > dependencies are too coarse grained. They pull in a lot of transitive
> > dependencies that don't affect actual use. Which is what determines
> > compiler requirements.
> That's not unexpected. I expect you did not use an old enough/platform
> specific enough compiler to require all the conditional dependencies.
> For example, if you used GCC3.3+ boost::config does not depend on
> boost::core for you.
But in terms of the compile, I believe config only depends on
"boost/type.hpp" and "boost/non_type.hpp" from core, which both depend
on nothing. So all the dependents pulled in by a modularization system
do not affect the compiler requirements at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk