Dependency report

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
I haven't run one of these in a while, so here it is.

http://pdimov.com/tmp/report-develop-6db78a0a6/module-overview.html
http://pdimov.com/tmp/report-develop-6db78a0a6/module-levels.html
http://pdimov.com/tmp/report-develop-6db78a0a6/module-weights.html

We have one "supermodule" at level 5 and another at level 13.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
> http://pdimov.com/tmp/report-develop-6db78a0a6/module-levels.html

One obvious low-hanging fruit here is moving <boost/next_prior.hpp> from
utility to iterator, breaking the utility -> iterator edge; I think this was
discussed recently?


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
On 07/17/17 16:29, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>> http://pdimov.com/tmp/report-develop-6db78a0a6/module-levels.html
>
> One obvious low-hanging fruit here is moving <boost/next_prior.hpp> from
> utility to iterator, breaking the utility -> iterator edge; I think this
> was discussed recently?

I don't think it was (or may be I missed it).

Strictly speaking, boost::next/prior is not tied to iterators; it is
compatible with any type that has the necessary operators (e.g.
integers). Although the use case with iterators is probably the most
frequent.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Peter Dimov wrote:
> One obvious low-hanging fruit here is moving <boost/next_prior.hpp> from
> utility to iterator, breaking the utility -> iterator edge; I think this was
> discussed recently?

I posted a related thread last month during the discussion on
IteratorTraversalCategory-aware boost::advance (at that time,
I didn't know that boost::next/prior is not only for iterators),
but I got no response:

  [boost] [iterator][utility] Move utility/next_prior.hpp to Iterator module?
  https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2017/06/236656.php

Regards,
Michel

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
On 7/17/2017 6:11 PM, Michel Morin via Boost wrote:

> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> One obvious low-hanging fruit here is moving <boost/next_prior.hpp> from
>> utility to iterator, breaking the utility -> iterator edge; I think this was
>> discussed recently?
>
> I posted a related thread last month during the discussion on
> IteratorTraversalCategory-aware boost::advance (at that time,
> I didn't know that boost::next/prior is not only for iterators),
> but I got no response:
>
>    [boost] [iterator][utility] Move utility/next_prior.hpp to Iterator module?
>    https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2017/06/236656.php

The change pushed by Andrey was to have iterator not use boost::prior
rather than to move boost/next_prior.hpp to iterator.

>
> Regards,
> Michel


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Strictly speaking, boost::next/prior is not tied to iterators; it is
> compatible with any type that has the necessary operators (e.g. integers).

Is it possible to deprecate the use of boost::next/prior for non-iterator types?
For non-iterator types, boost::next requires op+ or op+= (and similarly
boost::prior requires op- or op-=).
I think we can just use op+, unless the type has op+= but not op+.

Regards,
Michel

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Edward Diener wrote:
> The change pushed by Andrey was to have iterator not use boost::prior rather
> than to move boost/next_prior.hpp to iterator.

Right, that change is to cut the cyclic dependency between boost/next_prior.hpp
and boost/iterator/reverse_iterator.hpp.

Andrey also pushed the change where boost/next_prior.hpp started to use
boost/iterator/advance.hpp.

Regards,
Michel

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On 07/18/17 03:44, Michel Morin via Boost wrote:
> Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> Strictly speaking, boost::next/prior is not tied to iterators; it is
>> compatible with any type that has the necessary operators (e.g. integers).
>
> Is it possible to deprecate the use of boost::next/prior for non-iterator types?

It is possible, but I'm not sure why we would do that. What is the
problem that we're trying to solve?

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dependency report

Boost - Dev mailing list
Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On 07/18/17 03:44, Michel Morin via Boost wrote:
>> Is it possible to deprecate the use of boost::next/prior for non-iterator
>> types?
>
>
> It is possible, but I'm not sure why we would do that. What is the problem
> that we're trying to solve?

If Utility's dependency on Iterator is a problem,
the deprecation can help to move boost::next/prior to Iterator.
But the dependency is not a problem for me...

Regards,
Michel

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Loading...