kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: RTree implementation
On 8/6/2018 1:11 PM, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> Am Mo., 6. Aug. 2018 um 09:57 Uhr schrieb Wayne Stambaugh
> <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>>:
> On 8/6/2018 12:46 PM, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Hi,
> > On 06.08.2018 18:35, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> >> What are people's opinions on adding an additional boost
> > I would never have thought to say these words out loud, but in
> general I
> > prefer not reinventing the wheel.
> > Another Boost dependency is vastly preferable to having a block of
> > that only one or two people know how to maintain.
> > Simon
> I tend to agree but Boost 1.67 which is the latest release and was only
> release in April. I doubt 1.67 is widely availability except all but
> the latest distro releases so I'm sure there will be build issues if we
> bump the minimum boost version to 1.67.
> Our minimum version is 1.54 right now. The RTree implementation has
> been stable
> since then as long as we avoid things like R* and bulk loading, which
> shouldn't be an issue for our use case.
If this is the case, then I would think using boost would be the
preferred way to go. Just for clarification, is the boost rtree
implementation a header only boost library or does it require an
additional boost compiled library?