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

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Header only libraries, why not all?
From: Vicente Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-02 11:04:52

Sachin Garg wrote:
> 
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
> 
> 

have you tried on Nabble

http://old.nabble.com/forum/Search.jtp?forum=14201&local=y&query=header+only+library

Best,
Vicente
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Header-only-libraries%2C-why-not-all--tp27418612p27422907.html
Sent from the Boost - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.