Subject: Re: [boost] C++ Manifesto
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-13 19:17:36
On Sep 13, 2009, at 3:33 PM, christophe henry wrote:
>> Why is there no Boost.ANTLR?
> Good question. I mean, if Spirit seems to you such a disservice to
> the community that you write the xth post about it, why not show how
> to do it right? I'm sure we would all benefit from it, because right
> now, I haven't read anything constructive in this post.
> At least Joel spent lots of time to offer a great library to the C++
> community and I think he deserves better than such unconclusive
> criticism as "I think that it represents a disservice to the C++
> Seeing from his user base, I respectfully allow myself some to
> disagree on that point.
> Now the challenge is simple:
> Make it better and you'll earn yourself some respect.
> Don't provide any alternative and land from now on in my spam box.
I both agree and disagree with you - so I might up in your spam box as
Well, I read the "Manifesto" as a way to say that Boost, and Spirit,
for a particular(ly representative) example, is *too clever* and
somehow saves "C++'s face" instead of us all (or some of us)
abandoning that language in favor for one with more meta features
being intrinsic to the language, such as D.
But, I agree that it would be better to provide that Boost.ANTLR
(proposal) as part of the "Manifesto" ;-)
This is obviously getting pretty OT, but where should these meta
discussions take place?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk