Re: [boost] boost::directx?

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Gevorg Voskanyan (v_gevorg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-07 10:33:22

Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> DirectX doesn't need to be "wrapped", other than maybe using com_ptr.
> That is not my point.
> 
> My point is that there are structures and techniques that are general and
> useful for DirectX coders. These things should be in a common namespace.
> 
> Denying this reality does nothing but remove boost from reality.

I don't think anyone denies that. What we don't seem to agree on is whether that common namespace should start with ::boost::
 
> Cheers,
> Christian.

Regards,
Gevorg