Boost logo

Boost :

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-30 12:35:58

From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > About the logo... In keeping with the style it's simple;
> I know you put a great deal of effort into this, but IMO it's too
> complicated. Even though the first one was indeed too Borland-like,
> as a logo it functioned much better: it was simple, recognizable, and
> impactful.
> There is no obvious reason to me that the surrounding "<>" ought to
> have a different style from the "Boost" it contains. A similar
> argument goes for "{C++}". It's also not obvious that those are meant
> to be template brackets; they could be #include brackets.
> > * The slight perspective shadow of that, with the "{C++}" as part
> > of the shadow.
> > The hope is to invoke STL, templates, libraries, and C++.
> IMO it's trying too hard. My advice: don't try to evoke so many
> things. Say one thing and say it clearly.
> One idea that we might start with is enclosed

Shouldn't "Boost" be elevating "C++" rather than pushing it down
as depicted in your logo? IOW, giving C++ a boost should look
more like this:


Maybe use exponentiation?


The suggested rocket idea is good too:

  / \
 / \
/ \
| C++ |
| B |
| O |
| O |
| S |
| T |
 /\ /\

(Obviously, you'd want something a little more impressive than my
ASCII art.)

Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer           
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;

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