From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-17 07:58:48
From: "David Abrahams" <abrahams_at_[hidden]>
> I'm not offended in the least, and am happy to leave that decision up
> group at large. That said, I think it is important that if we decide
> accept py_cpp, that we understand the criteria for making that
> we can make them part of boost policy. So far, the remarks I've heard
> clearly state what it is that would cause py_cpp to be deemed
> inappropriate for boost.
I think that the boost monolithic library should be separated into
* Things that aren't in std:: for historical reasons (shared_ptr,
hash_map, possibly auto_array, later a labmda/expression library);
* Core components that aren't domain-specific; may or may not be
appropriate for std::, but layer 3 components depend on them;
* Domain-specific libraries (py_cpp, graph, regex) that aren't allowed
to depend on other layer 3 libraries, only on layer 2 and below.
The goal would be that layer 1 components will be 'essential', layer 2
components would be useful, but not mandatory unless using layer 3
-- Peter Dimov Multi Media Ltd.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk