On 1/14/24 08:41, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost wrote:
Dear fellow Boost authors,
As some of you may have heard.. Some of us have been working on making it possible to fully consume Boost in a modular arrangement. First some FAQs about this:
Q: What is a "modular arrangement"? A: It's when the libraries can be used, and hence built, without creating the monolithic headers, without needing the root build files, and without needing the libraries to be arranged in the usual root/libs/<name>.
Q: Will a modular Boost remove the Boost release? A: No. The collection of libraries is still a single release. See recent discussions about this.
Q: Will this change the testing? A: No, unless you want to. You will still be able to test the same non-modular way. But you could also test the modular way.
Q: Will this require that we change the current Boost source structure? A: Yes. Unfortunately there is one restriction that adhering to a modular Boost requires. We would not allow sublibs. That is, that we can't support having libraries in root/libs/thing/<library> style locations. All libraries must be single libraries under the root/libs directory. Thankfully there's only a handful of such libraries. The root/libs/numeric/* group of libraries.
Just out of curiosity. Above you're saying that the "modular" Boost will not require the root/libs/<name> structure, and yet the root/libs/thing/<library> arrangement is a problem. Could you elaborate why? Also, how will the "monolithic" Boost work if there is no root/libs/<name> structure? Or is the structure still required for the "monolithic" Boost?