Re: [boost] Request for comments on super-project workflow doc

Subject: Re: [boost] Request for comments on super-project workflow doc
From: JOAQUIN M. LOPEZ MUÑOZ (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-04 21:23:52

Em 05/01/2014, às 01:38, "Peter Dimov" <lists_at_[hidden]> escreveu:

> In principle, I've always argued that libraries should be designed in such a way so that adding support should not require including a header, but that's not the path of least resistance and if one doesn't specifically keep that requirement in mind, it's rare to see it satisfied. (And it's not always possible.)

This is what forward headers are for, right? (Not that these are consistently provided in Boost, though.)

Even if fwd headers were generally available, there is the problem of which submodule they should belong to in order to minimize dependencies:

• boost/fwd? (one module for all)
• boost/fwd_libx? (each its own fwd module)

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica Digital

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx