Boost logo

Boost :

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-18 21:26:07

Jeff Garland wrote:
> [...]
>>From a larger view, I'm really excited to see companies like Adobe and
> Google contributing C++ libraries into the community.

I second that. Even though Adobe is a member of the BSA and Google
isn't as squeaky clean as they like to present themselves, kudos to
both for their OSS initiatives.

> But we probably need ask if we should be turning around and attempting
> to boostify this code? ...2 reasons I can see for boostification are
> things that people want to standardize, and things that people want for
> other boost libs...

And I second this question as well. While code analysis tools are
definitely useful, they don't appear to take the form of a library,
par se (or perhaps I didn't look closely enough). And it seems
even less likely that such a tool would become part of C++. It
almost seems like asking to Boostify the GNU profiler or gdb. While
those are fine tools, they do just fine on their own without being
a part of Boost. BJam is a Boost tool, but it isn't a Boost library.
Perhaps we could sanction Google's offerings as "Blessed Boost tools",
but leave it at that?


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