Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-13 14:07:51

On 13 May 2015 at 13:52, Stefan Seefeld wrote:

> I think the answer is easy within the context I brought this up in:
> Niall is suggesting a clean break, with only little concern for any
> transition (refactoring).

If by "little concern" you mean I believe only the maintainer will do
the work necessary to modularise their library, then yes. I believe
you provide plenty of docs and a framework to help them out.
Otherwise modularisation to down to each maintainer.

Modularising a Boost library is an enormous amount of work because
you must formalise the dependencies into a specification framework
instead of assuming them. Far, far more work than most otherwise
intelligent commentors realise.

Even AFIO, an 18k line C++ 11 library, took me over 60 hours. A
library like Serialisation would take far longer (think weeks).

> Likewise, documenting the prerequisites is easy, if you have to do it
> upfront. It's only hard if these dependencies are implied, and only
> after the fact you need to re-discover them.

git submodules.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at