On 01.09.2010 14:51, Stewart, Robert wrote:
Boris Schaeling wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:48:43 +0200, Ilya Sokolov wrote:
In general Boost.Process depends on these header files from other Boost C++ libraries:
boost/algorithm/string/predicate.hpp
I don't think its use is justified.
You should clearly state your grounds for the objection.
Ok, see my other reply.
Quickly checked what is used where: find_executable_in_path() uses boost::algorithm::ends_with() and boost::algorithm::iends_with().
boost/filesystem/path.hpp boost/lexical_cast.hpp
ditto
find_executable_in_path() throws boost::filesystem::filesystem_error() if a program isn't found in PATH. boost::lexical_cast is used by named_pipe to convert the UUID (from Boost.Uuid) to a std::string.
That code from the included headers is used is, indeed, justification for their inclusion.
Any argument against that functionality should include an alternative implementation of the required functionality
Not sure
and a justification for choosing the alternatives.
Agreed.
Regarding the header files above: I wonder whether it makes sense to get rid of actual helpful functions like boost::algorithm::ends_with() only to remove a dependency on another Boost library. I understand the case about Boost.Filesystem which requires to be built. But it's a kind of strange goal for Boost libraries to reuse as little code as possible from other Boost libraries?
I agree. This has reared its head before. While gratuitous and superfluous dependencies should be avoided, the whole point of Boost is to provide ready made, well tested libraries of reusable code. If one Boost library cannot use another, why would we expect anyone else to use Boost libraries?
Why would we expect anyone to use some Boost library, if its usage is impossible without all other Boost libraries?
A dependency on Boost.Filesystem is reasonable to avoid, if possible, because it means Boost.Process could no longer be considered header only. However, filesystem_error seems a perfectly logical choice and, I presume, it would be expected by anyone already using Boost.Filesystem. More significantly, there was some mention of using boost::filesystem::path, IIRC, so the dependency exists independent of that error type.
"some mention of using boost::filesystem::path" doesn't mean that "the dependency exists independent of that error type".