Subject: Re: [boost] [type_traits] Modularization proposal
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-17 05:53:40
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> > How about we just remove the common_type include from type_traits.hpp?
>> That would be a breaking change, wouldn't it?
> It will break code that includes boost/type_traits.hpp and uses
> boost::common_type, yes. Since common_type is a relatively late addition,
> such code is, I submit, rare.
> It will also break the dependency of boost/type_traits.hpp on typeof. There
> are many libraries that include type_traits.hpp and do not use common_type,
> and this will automatically make them not depend on typeof.
I think such libraries should be fixed instead (by replacing
type_traits.hpp inclusion with more specific headers).
What is the reason of having type_traits.hpp in the first place? If
it's an "include all" header to simplify user's life then "all" means
all, including common_type, IMHO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk