From: William Kempf (sirwillard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-17 14:19:17
--- In boost_at_[hidden], Karl Nelson <kenelson_at_e...> wrote:
> > >
> > > on linux people use the defacto standard libsigc++
> > > http://libsigc.sourceforge.net/
> Libsigc++ is currently under going reconstruction to
> remove some of the overkill. However, as signals have to
> have a full type info, there will always be a requirement for
> a rather huge pile of templates.
Are you one of the developers doing the reconstruction?
Collaboration of ideas, if not of code, may be benefit to both
efforts. Who knows, maybe even sharing/merging of code is in order.
> > I'm familiar with libsigc++ from a high level stand point (looked
> > the documentation and code, but don't have real experience in
> > it). This library is a tad bit of overkill, IMHO, and I'm not
> > that the implementation is appropriate for Boost. For instance,
> > makes use of m4 scripts during building of the library and the
> Actually the m4 scripts are just used on unix to make the sources
> because I hate typing. They aren't required unless you plan to
> your own templates for arguments more than what is provided.
I realize that, but from a Boost perspective it still seems like
overkill. However, this was one of the more minor issues. It was
just one that was easily conjured up from memory when I posted. It's
been over a year since I looked at libsigc++. I've d/led the library
once again to refresh myself, just to make sure there aren't some
issues addressed there that should be evaluated again here.
> > library contains a LOT of code to deal with binding issues that,
> > again, I feel are best left to libraries such as Lambda.
> I am not really familar with Lambda. Is there docs on
> it? When I stated libsigc++ I was looking for a good
> library to do function casting, but nothing I found was
> that portable. The templates provided a decent balance.
The Lambda Library is in the files archive here, with docs. There's
a newer library available elsewhere, I believe, and I know that the
authors are working on enhancements/changes right now before
officially submitting it to Boost.
As for libsigc++ and boost... until the owners come forth with a
desire to work with Boost I don't know how beneficial it is to
discuss some of the areas I think are overkill in it. It's an
excelent library in it's own right but I think it addresses issues
different from our goals, so unless there was some joint efforts I'm
not sure that's a good base for us to start from here.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk