From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 14:20:02
> > There would be something to be said for
> > cutting thru all of this, slapping "namespace boost" around the Loki
> > working on getting it to compile on more platforms, and putting together
> > docs as phase 1.
> We have never approached a library that way to my knowledge. Should we start
> now? I don't think so, but here are some more questions which might help us
Sorry Dave, I didn't mean to leave out the review phase. By phase 1 I just
meant getting some part of Loki to a point where we have actual code that fits
Boost. I guess my point was that we have had alot of discussion on a couple (of
perhaps) rather small points before we even get to the meat of Loki. With that
in mind let me answer a couple of your questions:
> 1. If we do as Jeff suggests, how would the submitted code have benefitted
> from being hosted at boost?
In Loki's case I expect enhanced portability as a big benefit. I'm personally
much less interested in
> 2. How would boost users have benefitted from our hosting of that code?
Singleton, Multimethods, Vistor, and Factories. Real tools for building systems
that Boost doesn't have now. The benefits are going to be less where Boost
already has solutions: smart pointers, small object allocations, and functors.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk