Subject: Re: [boost] CMake, modular Boost, and other stories
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-04-23 20:38:20
On 2019-04-23 4:00 p.m., James E. King III via Boost wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:38 PM Rene Rivera via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I disagree. In my ideal world the "Boost" package wouldn't exist at all and
>> you would only install/use/find the individual Boost libraries. Anything
>> else is either living in the past or a convenient transitional method.
> One look at https://pdimov.github.io/boostdep-report/develop/module-overview.html
> is convincing enough to me that there are far too many dependencies to
> consider boost anything except a single packaged, versioned entity
> with many components.
That's a strange statement to make, as it suggests a false dichotomy. We
haven't even talked about the granularity of the "modules" yet !
I understand there are many strongly interconnected libraries in Boost.
However, there are also quite a few that no other Boost library depends
on, and which therefore could easily be considered stand-alone.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk