Re: [boost] CMake, modular Boost, and other stories

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:00 PM James E. King III wrote:

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:38 PM Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:

...

I disagree. In my ideal world the "Boost" package wouldn't exist at all

and

...

you would only install/use/find the individual Boost libraries. Anything else is either living in the past or a convenient transitional method.

One look at https://pdimov.github.io/boostdep-report/develop/module-overview.html is convincing enough to me that there are far too many dependencies to consider boost anything except a single packaged, versioned entity with many components.

You are being confused by the chaff. The important aspect to consider are the cycles in the dependencies. When we hit zero cycles it means that making Boost truly modular becomes a trivial problem. And we are making good strides in lowering that number. As you can see here < https://grafikrobot.github.io/boost_lib_stats/#_dependency_cycles>. Only down to two! We can do it! We can do it! Yes, we, can! Until C++ has package management that's as easy

to use and the dependencies are better managed with a tool and distribution system as powerful as, say, python's pip - I don't see that changing.

That is a chicken and egg argument. And we already have many chickens and eggs. Enough to suit many different styles of dependency and package management. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net