From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-19 15:01:25
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [boost] Benefit/Complexity ratio in libraries [was MPLcontainers and algorithms]
> From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> > There are cases where having two ways of doing something makes no
> > sense. But we shouldn't reject it out-of-hand. I hope the acceptance of
> > MPL by Boost won't discourage others from submitting a more minimalist
> > library.
> How many alternative libraries have been submitted for a topic that is
> already covered by a Boost library?
> This is a roundabout way to say that it _will_ discourage others. I say
> nothing about this being good or bad, and nothing about MPL in particular.
> It's just that "competition" within Boost is virtually nonexistant.
Is there a clear policy regarding this? I've always thought that it wasn't
possible to submit a competeting library to boost. Even if it is possible,
I'd imagine it would be an uphill battle. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk