Re: [Boost-Users] Re: Slight Alteration to Boost Directory Structure

From: William E. Kempf (wekempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-08 12:28:55

> From: "Paul Mensonides" <yg-boost-users_at_[hidden]>
> Date: 2003/01/08 Wed PM 12:18:35 EST
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [Boost-Users] Re: Slight Alteration to Boost Directory Structure
> 
> "William E. Kempf" <wekempf_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> 
> > > 2. Each library bundled with boost means another #include search
> > > path needs to be added.
> >
> > No, there's only one path added for all Boost libraries,
> $BOOST_ROOT/boost.
> 
> Here I think he is talking about libraries other than Boost.

How can anything we do to the Boost directory structure effect this?  I don't really think that's what he meant.
 
> > > Proposed solution:
> > > 1. Create a single boost include directory instead of having the two
> > > nested ones that there are now.
> >
> > What two nested ones?
> 
> I believe that he is talking about the root Boost directory which is the
> parent directory of the Boost headers.  If, for instance, I have a directory
> "include" that I want to put all my library headers in and have a single
> environment variable to specify the header search paths.  This cannot be
> done with Boost because the Boost headers are located at
> "boost/boost/*.hpp", not "boost/*.hpp".  Furthermore, you can't even put
> Boost in the same directory as other includes, because you might get a
> conflict between "include/boost" and "include/boost/boost".  It doesn't
> bother me personally, but I see the point that he is getting at.

If that's the point (which doesn't seem to be, since he talks about "new boost libraries" doing the right thing), I can't agree.  Moving Boost headers out of a boost subdirectory and into the top-level include directory (so <boost/shared_ptr.hpp> becomes <shared_ptr.hpp>) would only result in name clashes with other headers.

William E. Kempf
wekempf_at_[hidden]