Boost Users :
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Factory pattern ?
From: Maik Beckmann (beckmann.maik_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-29 10:33:37
Jeremy Pack schrieb am Donnerstag 23 Oktober 2008 um 18:50:
> 1 - The shared_library and type_map classes handle much of what you want
> for DSO. I'm still working on a few convenience functions for the
> shared_library class, and working on adding some safety mechanisms to help
> avoid problems with binary incompatibility. Is there any specific
> functionality you'd like to see that may not be there?
Just being more portable and having it's own testing harness which doesn't use
any of the factory part of boost.extension.
> 2 - There are very few interdependencies between classes in the library.
> Many of the classes require either the type_map class or the type info
> functionality, but there are few, if any, other interdependencies. This
> means that the library could be split up well in quite a number of ways. I
> hope to resolve the question of whether or not to split the library during
> a pre-review process.
If the DSO part lives in its own directory it is easier to identify its
I like to see boost.extension pops up on top when someone searches for
"C++ portable dlopen LoadLibrary"
so as much developers as possible feel boost being a good place to contribute
to C++ DSO handling, even if they are not interested into the factory part.
If the DSO part gets bigger and bigger, I suggest to make it an separate lib.
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net