From: David Abrahams (gclbb-jamboost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-21 00:46:11
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> As they say in XP, "you aren't gonna need it".
I disagree that this is YAGNI. Ali made some very convincing
arguments to me for cases which come up in his real projects.
> Nobody said that this limination will have any effect on existing
> projects. Further, now, how non-free features behave in conditional
> requirements is not specified and is quite confusing.
I cannot comprehend why it should be any more confusing to set
non-free features conditionally than it is to set free features
I think if conditional requirements and use-requirements that are
propagated do not combine intelligently with other conditional
requirements it's going to be even more confusing.
> We either have to fix this (which would take time), or impose the
> limitation. We can always lift it later.
Sure, that's always a good policy.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk