Re: [Boost-users] Header only libraries, why not all?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Header only libraries, why not all?
From: Sachin Garg (schngrg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-02 08:25:14

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Vladimir Prus <vladimir_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Sachin Garg wrote:
>
>> Header-only libraries are great as that eliminates the need for
>> building the libraries and then linking with them. But not all
>> libraries in boost are header only, which is an inconvenience.
>>
>> Is this only because of 'legacy', and with time all libraries will
>> move towards being header only? Or is there some technical requirement
>> due to which some libraries just can't ever be header-only?
>
> This question was discussed on Boost mailing lists at depth. Have you
> searched for those prior discussions?

Can you please provide link to that thread?

I tried a few google queries but they didn't show up any in-depth
discussion. THIS thread in on first page for "boost header only"
(without quotes) and some others I found discuss only which ones are
header only and which ones are not.

SG