Re: On Boost and modules

From: Rainer Deyke (rdeyke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-04-09 12:31:38

On 08.04.24 20:29, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> The more I read this thread, the more it seems to me that modules are 
> just a bad idea.  We already have shared libraries which are 
> redistributable and that's already a hassle given all the compiler 
> switches.  shared libraries have the same issue in that if one only 
> want's to use one function, the whole library has to be shipped.

This does not follow.  Shared libraries have problems, therefore modules 
(which /solve/ many of these problems) are a bad idea?  What?

I'm picturing a future where modules (in source code form) become /the/ 
way to distribute C++ libraries.  Advantages:
   - No more messing with build systems for the library author.  Just 
ship the source code.
   - No more messing with library build systems for the library consumer.
   - Unified build system does not need to differentiate between user 
files and library files.
   - Consistent macro-based configuration for all libraries, not just 
header-only libraries
   - No shared libraries = aggressive dead-code elimination at build 
time, resulting in massive reductions of code size.
   - No shared libraries = programs can ship as a single executable file.

-- 
Rainer Deyke (rainerd_at_[hidden])