CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++libraries
Velovix
Velovix

Reputation: 567

Common Practice For Library File Structure

Is there some kind of generally agreed-upon standard for how C++ libraries should be structured, file-wise? I'm thinking my library would be static. It's fairly expansive, so right now, I have classes split into different files. Each source file has a header file to go with it.

I don't want the end user to have to #include every one of my header files, obviously. I thought about having a single header file named "libraryname.h" that just #includes all the header files for the user, but I've never seen any other libraries do that, and I fear that's for a reason.

I've seen libraries use a single header file and multiple source files, which seems simple but also a bit cluttered. I've also seen libraries completely nix the idea of separating source and header files and just have one file with #define guards that has all the code. That seems like a pretty good way to dramatically increase compile time, which I'd like to avoid, but if there's a really compelling reason to do libraries that way, I'd love to know it. Any advice on what style to use would be appreciated!

Upvotes: 0

Views: 142

Answers (1)

Bathsheba
Bathsheba

Reputation: 234635

Having a single header file really slows down your build (i.e. a single change in one of your class declarations requires a full library build).

Also, you'll find that most source files will not need all the headers. You can also use forward declarations too which helps.

If your compiler supports precompiled headers, then that is the place to put all standard C++ library includes. But, don't put your headers in there or you'll force a whole library rebuild on a single change.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions