On 16 May 2014 at 13:49, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
Thoughts?
Why not let each library have their own choice of build tool, documentation format, etc. ? All dependencies need to be explicitly spelled out, not at the file level, but the package level, so building library X shouldn't need to be concerned at all about how its prerequisite library Y was produced (, documented, etc.).
I forgot to mention that it is also mandatory to package up your code as C++ Modules (these are now viably working on clang, or at least that's what Chandler told me last night). The dependency system is between C++ Modules. Regarding build tool, that's why I suggested cmake which to my knowledge makes it easy to wrap up any other build tool in cmake. Regarding documentation, well I find much of existing Boost documentation poor, not helped by inconsistencies in presentation. Besides, once you have it configured, the Boost.Geometry auto extracting docs generator is pretty damn neat. The very time consuming part is setting it up, and that's something which could be centralised by the community. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/