From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 16:41:34
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]>
> > 1. If we do as Jeff suggests, how would the submitted code have
> > from being hosted at boost?
> In Loki's case I expect enhanced portability as a big benefit.
Okay. Your suggestion specifically was to slap "namespace boost" around Loki
and get it to compile on more platforms, so I guess that's a given.
Normally, the boost process impacts library submissions in many more
positive ways than that, though. I don't think that it would be good to give
up on those benefits.
> 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
> that Boost doesn't have now.
These are already available to boost users at the MC++D site. I'm not
suggesting that these facilities wouldn't add value to boost. Of course they
would. But boost users don't need these things to be part of boost in order
to use them.
Boost users benefit from libraries being hosted at in part because of the
discussion and scrutiny that they receive when proposed/submitted.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk