Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compilerrequirements.

Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compilerrequirements.
From: Stephen Kelly (steveire_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-04 08:27:23

On 08/04/2013 02:09 PM, John Maddock wrote:
>> Correct. But they are in the boost::core library along with other files
>> which do have dependencies. Therefore as boost::config depends on
>> boost::core for only those two files, boost::config gets all the
>> dependencies of boost::core transitively. I'm actually even a bit
>> confused by what you wrote because I thought this would be very obvious.
>
> Sorry, but there is no Boost core library other than what you have
> chosen to define

Correction: I did not define anything about boost::core. I'm referring
to what is already the modularized layout, which afaik has already been
agreed upon and is somewhat inevitable. That is what should be
understood as the core library I refer to.

The contents of that library are somewhat orthogonal though:

> - one could just as easily place those two files as part of
> Boost.Config and break the dependency that way.  Just saying...

Correct. I wrote as much before and linked to it in my original mail.

 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/243094

I also referred to that since then here in the mail you quoted:

 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/243094/focus=243218

Stephen Kelly wrote:

> Please see also what I wrote before about moving those files being a

> potential solution in this particular instance, but that increasing the

> compiler requirement is the better solution because it enables further

> modularization:

> 

> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.ryppl.devel/201

> 

Ok, now I'm certain I'm just repeating myself :). That's not useful.

Thanks,

Steve.