From: Roland Schwarz <roland.schwarz@chello.at>
Perhaps we should set up a split directory structure instead?
But then I see two extremes: 1) A common header which is the only point where platform specific subheaders are ifdeffed into play. Building the lib is a separate issue and possibly could be solved by tweaking the bjam accordingly.
2) A common set of headers that defines the interface only and leave implementation to the platform files. However this seems prohibitive since this would forbid for platform specific inline optimizations.
Point 1) is at risk, that interfaces start to diverge and 2) still has the ugly ifdefs.
Breaking the platform-specific code into separate files keeps separate things separate and makes everything more readable. That seems like the appropriate course. However, doing so doesn't mean the interfaces need to diverge. I suggest this variation: 3) A common header or set of common headers that declare(s) the interfaces plus #ifdefs to include the appropriate platform-specific header(s). Thus, when including a.hpp, via conditional compilation, you may also get a_1.hpp, a_2.hpp, or a_3.hpp. Whether there are corresponding files a_1.cpp, a_2.cpp, a_3.cpp, or even a.cpp, is based upon need. The use of platform-specific headers allows for inline code, while the common header(s) allow(s) for a simply to grok declaration of the interfaces. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;