From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-12 16:11:44
From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> Thomas Witt <witt_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > David Abrahams wrote:
> >> It isn't clear to me why this particular
> >> compromise should be deemed worse than any of the others.
> > The reason I think it's worse is that I think it does not scale.
> Worse than what?
That's precisely what I wondered when I read his reply. Unless I
missed something, Thomas has yet to offer an alternative, yet
uses comparative language. It's easy to decry the real in light
of the unspoken ideal.
> > That being said, I'll stop complaining now and we'll see what time
> > will tell. It might well prove me wrong.
> I'd rather hear some real suggestions ;-)
Yes. If there are alternatives that have been forgotten or that
can be presented for consideration, we need to hear about them.
Both Boost.Range and Boost.Iostream will benefit.
-- Rob Stewart stewart_at_[hidden] Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk