2011/8/20 Beman Dawes<bdawes@acm.org>
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Mathias Gaunard< mathias.gaunard@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
I.....>Therefore, I would really like it if there was a lightweight header-only version of Boost.Filesystem. I don't need the full extent of features; I just need to have the ability to do the following portably: - read all files of a directory - create directories - remove files and directories - rename files and directories
The first point being the most important.
A header-only version would be a nice feature to offer.
But it may be more time consuming to implement than it would appear. Vicente Botet tried to do the same with Boost.System, and ran into problems. I reached to get a header-only version of Boost.System. The main issues raised by Beman were that we need to have a consensus on how all the
Le 20/08/11 18:07, TONGARI a écrit : header only libraries behave under cygwin respect to the WIN not WIN interface. IMO when we use cygwin we shouldn't use the Windows API, Bemans prefered to use it as it was available. If Beman is interested we can resume this task and see how several libraries can use the detail/win header only interface.
It seems to me that there should be some general recipe to create header-only libraries with identical functionality to the compiled library version. Has anyone figured out what that recipe is?
I gues I have reached it for Boost.Chrono.
Best, Vicente