coapp-developers team mailing list archive

[Philip Allison <mangobrain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Optional dependencies can be a mixed bag, but aren't always simply a matter
of choice.  Sometimes you might want to only build part of a large package,
which in its entirety provides more functionality than you need.  Sometimes
dependencies might only be necessary to provide functionality lacking from
some compilers, like STL or C++0x.  Case in point, I recently had to roll my
own std::shared_pointer like class, which uses a portable atomic ops lib for
thread safety.. but if your compiler supports shared pointers natively, you
don't need it, and you can't compile with both custom and native
implementations enabled.  Portability is a bitch, as I'm sure you know :)

For something like CoApp where we typically ship binary packages, picking
build options on a user's behalf is of course a given (source MSIs
notwithstanding), but I think it's a bridge that'll have to be crossed
eventually, especially if the aim is not to be tied to one toolchain.  Not
necessarily in version 1 though.

Short version: I agree, but have some food for thought ;)

Regards,
Phil