Parts of the documentation out of date

[Spacechild1]

Hi, first I want to express my gratitude for this wonderful library! It's almost indistinguishable from magic :)

The documentation is also very good IMO, I've only noticed a few parts that are out of date:

For example, https://sol2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/compilation.html talks about

possibly taking advantage of whatever C++17 features are made available by the compilers

or

formally make the library a C++17 one

but the current README (https://github.com/ThePhD/sol2/tree/develop?tab=readme-ov-file#supported-compilers) suggests that sol3 already is a C++17 library.

https://sol2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/features.html also refers to sol as a C++14 library. The feature matrix does not mention Lua 5.4 btw.

Another small example: https://sol2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/performance.html refers to a 2015 machine as recent :)

I can try to find more examples if that's helpful.

[VagueLobster]

but the current README (https://github.com/ThePhD/sol2/tree/develop?tab=readme-ov-file#supported-compilers) suggests that sol3 already is a C++17 library.

There's one particular thing that really bugs me in the README and that is:
sol2 is a C++ library binding to Lua. It currently supports all Lua versions 5.1+ (LuaJIT 2.0+ and MoonJIT included). sol2 aims to be easy to use and easy to add to a project. The library is header-only for easy integration with projects, and a single header can be used for drag-and-drop start up.

It's not header-only, it's headers-only with all those headers in the include/sol folder!

[Spacechild1]

It's not header-only, it's headers-only with all those headers in the include/sol folder!

A "header-only library" is a library that is implemented only in header files. It does not mean that it consists of a single header file! I don't know where you got that idea from... Personally, I have never seen anyone make a distinction between "header-only" and "headers-only". I don't even see how such a distinction would be useful.

[VagueLobster]

It's not header-only, it's headers-only with all those headers in the include/sol folder!

A "header-only library" is a library that is implemented only in header files. It does not mean that it consists of a single header file! I don't know where you got that idea from... Personally, I have never seen anyone make a distinction between "header-only" and "headers-only". I don't even see how such a distinction would be useful.

It confused the hell out of me, that's all! Because whenever i've seen header-only libraries, they've all been a single header, this is the first time i've stumbled onto this type of header-only library! Like i said in my original comment it just bugs me, don't sweat it 👍

[Spacechild1]

Because whenever i've seen header-only libraries, they've all been a single header, this is the first time i've stumbled onto this type of header-only library!

I see! Actually, there are many header-only libraries like this. For example, most boost libraries are header-only and they all consist of multiple header files. Another very popular header-only library is ASIO, which again consists of many, many header files.

EDIT: would you mind hiding your comments as "resolved"? I well then do the same for my replies.