Re: [boost] Re: Divergent Paths in Boost?

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-28 06:34:47

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>
>>> (Note that "anything goes" is extreme.  The accepted libraries
>>> would still be expected to meet the highest standards, they just
>>> wouldn't have to be LWG ready to be accepted.)
>>
>> If a library meets the highest standards, how can it not be "LWG
>> ready"?
>
> Say, is it possible for BGL to become part of the standard? Even if
> documentation is expanded twice and the amount of comments in code
> becomes larger than the amount of the code? Seems to me that it's too
> domain-specific, and large, to be in standard. But it's sufficiently
> usefull to be in Boost.

Using undefined terms always leads to confusion. ;-)

For me, "LWG ready" doesn't mean that it can become part of the standard. A
library is "LWG ready" from Boost point of view if you can answer with a
(possibly qualified) "yes" to the question "if this library becomes part of
the standard library, would it fit in?"