On 3 Feb 2015 at 15:26, Robert Ramey wrote:
I've made a more concrete proposal. I believe that some variation of this could be made to work. I think it addresses the real problems that users face. In order for it to work, tools have to be improved and/or boost policies might need to be tweaked (perhaps a "no convenience headers" policy). There is just no way simply "splitting a library" is going to really address anything and move us forward.
That last statement is simply untrue Robert. Have a look at https://ci.nedprod.com/view/Boost.AFIO/job/Boost.AFIO%20Build/ where the CI is now build testing all platforms for standalone use as well as Boost use. Standalone = no Boost whatsoever. So yes, splitting a library definitely can address a lot. I might add that the standalone build is 2x-5x faster than the Boost build for all unit tests. It's an enormous productivity, as well as convenience and ease of install, boon. And it really ought to be considered as the *recommended* future for all new and most existing Boost libraries instead of being constantly dismissed out of hand. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/