Subject: Re: [boost] [config] request for BOOST_NO_FWD_STD_DECLARATION
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-16 11:56:07
>> Can't this be taken one step further, and introduce something
>> like boost/details/stdfwd.hpp, or maybe boost/stdfwd.hpp? In
>> the case where forwarding is not possible, stdfwd.hpp would
>> have to include all std::containers
>
> In the fallback case, you'd force inclusion of <map>, <multimap>, <set>,
> etc. for some context that, otherwise, would only have included, say,
> <vector>. That's not a good tradeoff. Instead of stdfwd.hpp, it'll have to
> be map_fwd.hpp, multimap_fwd.hpp, and so on.
>We've already got such a thing, it's called
>'boost/detail/container_fwd.hpp'. It deals with all the containers
>because it was originally written for the hash library, which needs
>them all. But IMO If you just want a single container, you might as
>well just include the header. They're not that expensive.
In which case do we need to do anything - other than make the libraries that
should use that header but don't, use it?
John.