My apologies, I read your message too quickly. Tim, your snippet is not from stout, it's from libprocess' 3rdparty makefile.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Benjamin Mahler <[email protected] > wrote: > Well, we should fix the forced linkage, it's not the intent. > > I assume that's what you mean by "leaks it's abstractions".. yes? > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Tim St Clair <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> FWIW - Stout isn't a self contained header only library, and it leaks >> it's abstractions. >> Currently it will force linkage anyway... >> >> stout_tests_LDADD = \ >> libgmock.la \ >> $(LIBGLOG) \ >> $(LIBPROTOBUF) \ >> -ldl \ >> -lsvn_subr-1 \ >> -lsvn_delta-1 \ >> -lapr-1 >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Benjamin Mahler" <[email protected]> >> > To: "dev" <[email protected]> >> > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 1:58:24 PM >> > Subject: Re: Using boost filesystem >> > >> > These have been around 3rd party libraries, e.g. glog, svn, protobuf, >> etc. >> > Here the choice to use these external libraries is made in the code that >> > uses stout. If they don't use protobuf, they don't include stout's >> protobuf >> > header, and they don't link it in. There should be no surprise to the >> > library user here. >> > >> > path.hpp seems a lot more general, no? A lot of users of stout will >> want to >> > do filesystem operations. Requiring them to link in boost once they >> include >> > the header seems surprising given the header-only design of stout. >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Cody Maloney <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > > It's not header only. >> > > >> > > I think we actually need a general discussion around upgrading all the >> > > libraries mesos depends upon (Using a plain up-stream boost, etc). >> > > >> > > Note that some portions of stout already require callers to link >> against >> > > specific libraries for them to actually work, so I don't think the >> > > header-only is that big of a requirement. But definitely we should >> have a >> > > discussion around it. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Is it header only? >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Alexander Rojas < >> > > [email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Hey guys, >> > > > > >> > > > > I was checking one of my reviews which call for using some >> > > unimplemented >> > > > > functionality in stout path. Since that class has no methods, >> > > attributes >> > > > or >> > > > > anything apart from a string value attribute; I was left >> wondering, >> > > > wether >> > > > > it makes sense to use boost filesystem. >> > > > > >> > > > > Boost filesystem v3 has all the functionality we may need from a >> path >> > > > > class, it is the basis fro a technical recommendation ( >> > > > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4100.pdf >> < >> > > > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4100.pdf >> >) >> > > and >> > > > > might become part of the standard in the future. Why not adopt it >> in >> > > > mesos? >> > > > > >> > > > > Alexander >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Timothy St. Clair >> Red Hat Inc. >> > >
