Subject: Re: [boost] [type_traits] Modularization proposal
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-16 14:04:14
Andrey Semashev-2 wrote
> I propose to extract common_type.hpp (and its implementation and tests)
> into a
> sublib within type_traits (e.g. type_traits/common_type).
I would like to know what "sub lib" means in this context. Is it a git
Something that is somehow "embedded" in another module or what?
I all you mean is that it has it's own module in our current "flat" list of
that might be OK. Though it's unclear about what benefit it has.
See my other post on this subject.
The "modularization" can't be considered independently of the benefit is
it mean to provide. Possible benefits might be
a) faster builds
b) easier maintenance
c) smaller distributions of boost subsets
d) more clearly defined responsibilities
and of course there might be other consequences depending on how
modularization is "undertaken"
a) slower builds
b) harder maintenance
c) larger distributions of boost subsets
e) less clearly defined responsibilities amongst boost authors.
But what i really missing is which benefits we hope to achieve for which
group of users. I haven't seen this yet.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/type-traits-Modularization-proposal-tp4667626p4667627.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk