Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Stephen Kelly (hello_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 17:29:05

Niall Douglas wrote:

> On 13 May 2015 at 14:19, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> 
>> >> 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.
>> 
>> That's only useful if you still want to work with the whole boost source
>> tree as a whole, so I see it as a transitional measure.
> 
> Eh? Each git submodule is a direct dependency. Any git submodules
> inside those is their direct dependencies.

Haha!

Enjoy handling cycles :)

Also enjoy explaining to Robert what 'cycles' and 'dependencies' are :). 
Solve that problem and Boost might not be completely out in the cold as far 
as C++17/Clang modules are concerned.

Thanks,

Steve.