RE: [boost] Submission: typelist

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 17:05:24

> > In Loki's case I expect enhanced portability as a big benefit.
>
> Okay. Your suggestion specifically was to slap "namespace boost" around Loki
> and get it to compile on more platforms, so I guess that's a given.
> Normally, the boost process impacts library submissions in many more
> positive ways than that, though. I don't think that it would be good to give
> up on those benefits.

I was just suggesting a course of action, perhaps with a little too much drama.
An open review, of course, will always improve a library, but we won't get there
if we scare Andrei off b/f he even uploads Loki....

> > I'm personally
> > much less interested in
>
> in what?

I wish I knew -- a thought lost in time ;-)

> > > 2. How would boost users have benefitted from our hosting of that code?
> >
> > Singleton, Multimethods, Vistor, and Factories.  Real tools for building
> systems
> > that Boost doesn't have now.
>
> These are already available to boost users at the MC++D site. I'm not
> suggesting that these facilities wouldn't add value to boost. Of course they
> would. But boost users don't need these things to be part of boost in order
> to use them.

Last I knew the only site for MC++D is the download page on the awl site.  This
lacks mailing lists, support, historic context, CVS, etc.  Boost adds much for
the user community here.

> Boost users benefit from libraries being hosted at in part because of the
> discussion and scrutiny that they receive when proposed/submitted.

In part.  Online documentation, portability, standards compliance, etc.  There
are many reasons.

Jeff