Compilation time realistically is not a big problem. Managing compilation units by grouping up what changes infrequently actually make compilation faster in general and much faster incrementally.
Even visual studio's compiler compiles sqlite's 6MB in under a second.
> Again this is specific to header-only libraries, but to avoid code bloat you'll need to turn on link-time optimisation
This is nonsense. This list seems like you are trying to invent problems that aren't there. The vast majority of the time you decide what compilation unit to put the definitions into and that's it.
> Compilation time realistically is not a big problem. ... sqlite's 6MB in under a second
SQLite is notably pure C, which compiles orders of magnitude faster than C++, or at least certain types of C++.
I've worked on a project - not particularly large - where using precompiled headers reduced compilation time from something like an hour and a half to more like 15 minutes. Admittedly that's a very old crusty laptop, but that's without building the libraries, which are compiled separately! Even on much faster modern machines, building the dependencies is at least an hour, maybe more.
I wonder if our opinions are so strongly at odds because we're simply working in totally different situations to start with. As I hope I've illustrated, compilation time definitely IS an issue for us, but obviously it's not for the projects you're working on - which must surely be C-based or at least C-like C++ code. I would wager more people are in my situation, but to some extent that's irrelevant. The advice to other devs has to be: if you're happy to restrict yourself to small C or C-like libraries then single file libraries are fine, but if you want to take advantage of the full C++ ecosystem be aware that there package managers (again, I'm mainly thinking vcpkg) you can use with only a little initial effort. I think it's dangerous for beginners to see articles like the one linked to here in case it makes them think that using C++ has to be like that.
> > Again this is specific to header-only libraries, but to avoid code bloat you'll need to turn on link-time optimisation
> This is nonsense. ... The vast majority of the time you decide what compilation unit to put the definitions into and that's it.
I said that this paricular objection obly applies to header-only libraries, and that qualification is even in the bit you quoted. I never claimed that there are no single-file libraries that allow separate compilation.
But I do dispute that the "vast majority" allow or require separate compilation (either as a separately supplied .c/.cpp file, or by #defining something before one of the uses of the header). That is the exact opposite of my experience. As an experiment I looked at all the libraries listed under "argv" in the linked article, and 9 of them were header only with no option for separate compilation (Argh!, Clara, CLI11, cmdline, flags, kgflags, linkom, optionparser, ProgramOptions.hxx) while only 1 (parg) allowed separate compilation.
But is it due to 'single file libraries'? What I've seen is that having fewer, fatter compilation units speeds up compilation the same way 'unity builds' do. Instead of having a single monolithic compilation unit, a balance can be used to iterate faster and use multiple cores. Compilation units can be groups of things that are changed more or less frequently.
> But I do dispute that the "vast majority" allow or require separate compilation
It isn't about the library always being made for separate compilation. The reality is that unless you are using something fairly fundamental it will probably only need to be in one compilation unit in the first place.
What does need to be shared are data structures and those ideally have as little logic and dependencies as possible.
> > compilation time definitely IS an issue for us,
> But is it due to 'single file libraries'?
That's a fair point, they're generally not. I just meant that if those libraries were single file, but otherwise unchanged, then the problem would only be worse. I see what you're saying about unity builds, but if you build your dependencies totally separately from the rest of your program then it's not so important exactly how fast they build. I'm imagining a situation where you leave vcpkg to build all your libraries overnight, then you spend the next few weeks iteratively working on your application code (which is how it usually works for us).
> The reality is that unless you are using something fairly fundamental it will probably only need to be in one compilation unit in the first place.
In the projects I work on, which are really quite varied, many (but not all) libraries are used throughout the codebase as vocabulary types. Again, I think this just comes down to very different codebases and uses of libraries for us.
> libraries are used throughout the codebase as vocabulary types. Again, I think this just comes down to very different codebases and uses of libraries for us.
I don't know what 'vocabulary types' are, but I think this is an oversimplification. My guess is that most big programs end up like yours but my point is that it doesn't have to be this way. Single file libraries are not the problem and can actually help, although the real issue is deeper.
I think the problem is actually dependencies and many times single file libraries go to great lengths to not depend on anything else. To keep it as simple as possible, I think classes / data structures get over used and instead of just making an interface to some data, people stuff everything they are doing into some class they have.
Transformations from one type to another put into data structures means that the class now has dependencies on those other types. If those types have transformations then they have dependencies and so on. The extrapolation is that everything depends on everything else and even compilation units that should be tiny end up pulling in large parts of the entire program as source code. Lots of compilation units can then mean compiling huge chunks of the source hundreds of times.
Even visual studio's compiler compiles sqlite's 6MB in under a second.
> Again this is specific to header-only libraries, but to avoid code bloat you'll need to turn on link-time optimisation
This is nonsense. This list seems like you are trying to invent problems that aren't there. The vast majority of the time you decide what compilation unit to put the definitions into and that's it.