Re: [Boost-users] Request for an addition in Boost Coding standard

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Request for an addition in Boost Coding standard
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-06-17 08:05:46

On 17 June 2011 12:37, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Hmmm..  may be i am ignorant here. But here we are referring to classes
> which contain containers like string and vector and deque.

Then you're restricting future changes to the implementation by saying
that memory can only managed using containers. You've also still got
the problems I mentioned with separate compilation and increased
complexity. For example, boost::filesystem::path is not a template and
is largely compiled separately. If allocator support was required,
that wouldn't be possible.

The more general point is that adding any extra feature to a library
increases its complexity and with each new feature this accumulates.
So no extra feature is ever just a simple change.