Boost logo

Boost :

From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-20 13:48:17

Jose wrote:
> I would like to bring up some ideas to improve the review process:

> e.g. the current Property List library being reviewed:
> - shouldn't it be part of the existing program options library (if its
> intended usage is similar to program options library vs a generic tree
> container) ?

Just to get rid of some confusion here: The Property Tree Library does
not have the same goal as the program option library and the two
libraries are very different. The Property Tree Library does allow you
to build quick option parsers, but this is not the main motivation for
the library, and it is perfectly valid for a library to include such a
facility in the review process. If the majority of reviewers actually
think it is better to use the Program Option Library we can always
exclude this particular part of The Property Tree Library. That said, my
pre-review assessment as review manager was that the overlap was minimal.


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