-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Konstantin Litvinenko Sent: 10 April 2007 12:20 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] Hybrid compilation model? was: [system]
BD> I'll like to challenge Boosters to think about this problem a bit more, BD> and I'd love to see someone who understands the challenges take, say, BD> Boost.System and demonstrate how it could be packaged for either BD> header-only or compiled-library use. The important goal would be to BD> abstract what to done into a general set of guidelines (and any BD> configuration support needed). In other words, we don't so much need a BD> solution for Boost.System as for any Boost library that would benefit BD> from a hybrid computation model.
Don't you see that the root of all these problems derived from statement "There are no one standart way do download, deploy, build procedure in C++ world"? If boosters define such procedure and make all these things easy to do, than all, developers and users, will be happy. No need to think about complex configs to support hybrid models or other magic things. Developers will focus on library implementation, not on "how to make this header only?". Users will build apps without spending dozen of hours to figure out how to integrate libxxx into environment.
I think we need infrastructure that removes all these issues.
Sorry, but I don't think this infrastructure exists, nor will it ever exist. Nor will a Boost 'standard' way of building things become widely adopted. I agree with Beman that we need to cater for both library and header-only. It's more trouble for the library authors, but we should assume they are more expert ;-) Paul --- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow@hetp.u-net.com