Re: [boost] To modularize, or not to modularize. What is the plan?

Subject: Re: [boost] To modularize, or not to modularize. What is the plan?
From: stefan (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-05-08 15:07:07

On 2019-05-08 12:27 a.m., Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> On 8/05/2019 14:33, Rene Rivera wrote:
>> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 9:12 PM Peter Dimov wrote:
>>> This will happen automatically if building with b2 or CMake, 
>>> assuming that
>>> the dependencies - including the header-only ones - are properly 
>>> "linked
>>> to". Not when just adding a bag of sources to a project though.
>>
>> True.. But users already do similar operations when adding Boost and 
>> other
>> libraries.
>
> Currently, most users just say "I want to use Boost" and add one 
> include path and one library path.
>
> In a modular Boost world, perhaps a user might say "I want to use 
> Boost.Thread", and add one include path and one library path.
>
> Except that this won't work without the "preprocessing".  I don't 
> think that this user would want to add the 62 other libraries (I 
> counted) that are apparently required (according to boostdep/depinst) 
> in order to use Boost.Thread.
>
> (Granted, it's probably being overly pessimistic -- I don't see why 
> Boost.Thread should depend on Boost.Regex, for example -- but that's 
> where we are right now.)

I agree. But this isn't new, and both B2 as well as CMake (to name just 
those two) can already handle transitive requirements. So it's already 
is possible for a user to ask "I want Boost.Thread, so give me all the 
compiler flags I need." and have everything else sorted out 
automagically. No preprocessing has to be involved.

Regards,

Stefan

--
       ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...