Subject: Re: [boost] [type_traits] Modularization proposal
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-17 15:16:55
>>> Hmm, I didn't notice that header. Ok, assuming we don't want to move
>>> this one
>>> header to its own sublib, what if we approach it from the other side.
>>> We can
>>> move all type traits except common_type.hpp and type_traits.hpp to a
>>> base (i.e. type_traits/base). floating_point_promotion.hpp would be
>>> changed to
>>> not depend on MPL before moving to base.
>> This seems almost ridiculous. If one can choose to not include the headers that incur the dependencies, then one can avoid then when desired. Those that don't care will just include boost/type_traits.hpp.
> The problem is that dependencies (for installation, not compilation)
> will unlikely be tracked on per-header basis, but rather on
> per-library basis.
The point is that currently there is no tracking of dependencies at all,
as I've said before it's all vapour-ware at present, I see no great
benefit in pushing stuff around until there's a definite target to aim at.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk