Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] CMake, modular Boost, and other stories
From: Mike (mike.dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-04-23 21:28:23

   I'm very much in favor of separate packages.
   James is right, that - at the moment - most boost
   libraries are so tightly coupled that they can't really
   be treated as separate libraries, but when changing things it is just
   as important to ask, "Where do you want to go?" as "where you are now".
   I for one very much hope that boost (at least the libraries that
   are actively maintained) will become less coupled
   in the future, such that when I just want to use
   library X, the rest of boost doesn't come as a
   dependency with it. It also fits the management
   structure (or rather the lack thereof) much better.
   Also, the mechanisms for modular boost distributons already exist
   through e.g. vcpkg and
   conan, so I don't see the problem in also providing
   independent cmake configfiles.
   Finally: About how many libraries are we talking here anyway? Only the
   compiled ones get their separate config file - correct?

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