Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] Improving/splitting up detail
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-05 01:17:22
On 2/11/2013 22:47, Quoth Andrey Semashev:
> There are things not intended for public use and yet useful for multiple
> libraries. I don't think these components should be made a public part of
> utility, but making them a private part of it seems ok to me.
If something has proven useful for multiple Boost libraries, why
wouldn't it be useful for application code?
The only reason I can think of is simply that whoever wrote it doesn't
want to pay the costs of documenting, reviewing, and at least somewhat
preserving compatibility between releases -- but without documentation,
review, and some kind of cross-release compatibility, why would any
Boost library authors want to depend on it either?
Especially once Boost goes modular and a library author might make
potentially breaking changes to some of the common code without even
having downloaded some of the other libraries that depend on it
(possibly thereby not realising the change was breaking, at least until
the testers have cycled).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk