From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-07 16:06:46
Beman Dawes wrote:
> In general I like it. A few details are worth discussion:
> * The "STL" top-level category should be eliminated IMO
> (thus Containers, Algorithms, Iterators, and Function objects
> become top-level categories).
That would be fine with me.
> There really isn't any "STL"
> anymore as a separate entity, and the term causes occasional
Yes, and actually I myself don't like the "sloppy" usage of the term in
application to the standard library components. I just wanted to somehow
group together these categories, and "STL" word was the first thing that I
thought of, looking at so familiar "Containers, Algorithms, Iterators"
> * The categories should be ordered in some way. Maybe
I thought about sorting them according to their "genericity" (in sense "how
general purpose the category is"), e.g. "Algorithms" and "Iterators" before
"Math and numerics" and "Correctness and testing", "Memory" and "String and
text processing" before "Algorithms" and "Iterators", and "Inter-language
support" before "Broken compiler workarounds" (and that's what I tried to do
in my draft), but obviously this would be very subjective. On the other
hand, I certainly do feel like placing "Broken compiler workarounds" at the
end of the list.. Opinions, please?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk