Gennaro Prota wrote: > > More generally, cleaning up implementations is IMHO a "must do" at > this point of the boost evolution. Rather than worrying about ordinary > releases, I think we should have the library undergoing a global > review, focused on eliminating the noise that have been accumulating > over the years, and the existence of ad hoc solutions in each library > for things that could be factored out in an autonomous component (e.g. > is_signed and related stuff in numeric_traits). Also, I hate the > enormous degree of coupling of most type_traits components: let's say > I include boost/type_traits/is_integral, which should be the most > simple thing in the world to implement. Well, under the appearance of > an innocent: > > #include "boost/type_traits/detail/bool_trait_def.hpp" > > I end up including: > > - template_arity_spec.hpp > - bool_c.hpp > and > - lambda_support.hpp" (!!!) > > And lambda_support, in turn, includes so much preprocessor stuff that > I think it is more than what I would have in the whole application > hadn't I included is_integral. So why should I use it? After all I can > write the same in portable C++. And, by portable I mean effectively > portable even to broken compilers (the ones I use, of course).
You managed to express what I always felt but couldn't write down. Thank you for this fine analysis of the situation. > What to say? Just that I expect someone to be hurt by these words and > reply with a biting tone. Probably something along the lines of: if > you have something better then propose it! I know, in any case, c'est > la vie... :-) I doubt that you hurt anyone. If someone did so, it was me. Sorry again :) Regards, Daniel -- Daniel Frey aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany fon: +49 (0)241 936737-42, fax: +49 (0)241 936737-99 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], web: http://www.aixigo.de _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost