Boost logo

Boost :

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-28 19:19:48

"Philippe A. Bouchard" <philippeb_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> [...]
> Too bad. 'Boost' sounded like a performance catalyst.

Well, as the story of the colleagues of the Boost founders
apparently wrote up the spec to a language called "Booze", which was
supposed to be "better than Java". When trying to come up with a
name for the library, Booze somehow got morphed into Boost, which
means to imply a boost in productivity, I assume (not having to rewrite
code that is available in pre-written libraries). I can't think of a single
library in Boost that specifically exists to be a faster version of
something else that is commonly used. Many libraries are a feature
superset of existing code, perhaps; but their focus tends to be to
provide correct, portable code rather than blazingly fast code (though
unnecessarily slow code is obviously frowned upon).


P.S. One could argue that boost::pool exists to provide a faster
allocator than say, malloc. Or, one could argue that it exists to use
memory more efficiently. ;)

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at