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 14:45:50

On 13 May 2015 at 14:36, Stefan Seefeld wrote:

> On 13/05/15 02:10 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> > If Boost decides on a future build system solution, we can do better
> > than that.
> Right. But again, much as you said earlier, this needs to be a help to
> boost library authors, not liability. In other words, boost library
> authors should have the freedom to pick the tools of their choice to
> develop (including build and package) their respective libraries.
> And thus, in that new world, "if boost decides" wouldn't be valid,
> because each boot library project has to decide for itself.

I can only deliver the parts which I can deliver. I can deliver true
modularity, version specific dependencies, and dependency injection.
I currently must demand header only everything because it avoids the
build system problem.

It is up to the community to decide that. I have delivered on viable
first step on that path. The community can decide if that is
worthwhile too, or if a better solution is preferable.

I certainly think that deciding everything now is unfeasible. Decide
what there is consensus on, build on that, reconsider the remaining
problems later.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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