Clarification: each collection of related library functions should have its own associated header file

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This issue has been split out from issue #10, which included three separate 
header-related issues.  There the first issue stated:

1. How should the header files for the optional/required libraries be organized?

The gist of the issue is should each new collection of library functions have 
its own associated header file that should be separately #include-d?

This issue proposes that each collection of related library functions should 
have its own associated header file.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by gary.funck on 17 Jul 2012 at 7:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

We seem to have consensus that each major library outside of the core should 
have its own header file. 

The main benefit of this policy is allowing third-party implementations of 
these libraries to work alongside a UPC compiler, for library prototyping or 
possibly even to replace the default library provided by the compiler (UPC-IO 
being an obvious example of the latter).

Original comment by danbonachea on 13 Aug 2012 at 1:24

• Changed state: Done