From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-24 16:49:15
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>; <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Review: Boost Coding Guidelines
> At 04:54 PM 7/24/2001, David Abrahams wrote:
> >We are not a standards body (we are more like a library vendor) and as
> >I disagree here. I want to continue to maintain a high QOI here at boost
> >and I don't think it would be a mistake to mandate it.
> "mandate" sounds too dogmatic. "strongly encourage" sounds better.
I don't mean to be dogmatic about coding style, but I think we are all
prepared to reject a library with low QOI. Too dogmatic? I don't think so.
> Once a set of guidelines has been widely used for a period of time, and
> corner cases identified and dealt with, then you can lobby for applying
> more of the guidelines more of the time. Eventually they might even be
> complete enough to lobby for following them 100% of the time. But that is
> a long way off. Pressing too hard now will just turn people off. They
> aren't even at release 1.0 yet.
I'm not talking about mandating guidelines, only quality.
I'm just arguing with the assertion that we don't care about QOI. That would
only be true if we were just publishing interfaces for others to implement.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk