On 12/8/04 3:23 AM, "Vladimir Prus" <ghost@cs.msu.su> wrote: [SNIP]
The proposed course of action is documented in:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/106122
Now:
1. Are there any objections?
Yes. I'm looking at: //==================================================== Yeah, I think that's possible. So I'm going to: 1. put new header to boost/detail 2. put new source to libs/detail/utf 3. #include new source in program_options. //==================================================== I don't think any #include to the "libs" directory is a good idea. It works only if an expanded Boost archive stays as-is. If the sub-directories are scattered, e.g. to meet Unix header placements, then the idea fails. I think some existing code tries to #include "libs," that code should be changed. This could be a further argument to finally move mandatory source files to a distinct root-level directory.
2. Who does it? I can do it soon. Robert, what do you think?
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com