Subject: Re: [boost] [spirit] New Header Structure [was Re: Proposal: Add Loki Library's SafeFormat to Boost:]
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-08 19:23:39
Markus Werle wrote:
> Joel de Guzman wrote:
> The problem is: your perfect solution is perfect, but disliked.
> Me, too, voting against it, due to confusion.
> I already stated in the thread "Breaking existing libraries"
> that the complete redesign of the interface should
> have forced a new name for the library.
> I know there is a thin line between new library
> and new version of a library, but spirit2 is NOT
> a new version of spirit at all.
> It is a 250% redesign and concept rework based
> on completely different libs like proto.
> I drop into this discussion here because for
> future changes of the boost library I'd like to see
> some rules established that disallow such header magic
> for well-established, mature parts of boost.
Oh man! Here I go again: If you have some problems, please do
as a we normally do: post a minimal cpp file that exhibits
the problem. Better yet, submit a trac ticket. Otherwise,
I can never every know what the problem really is.
What you are saying is not what Robert is saying. Robert says
that the solution is flawed. You say it is perfect but disliked.
Did you lose context here? Is what you are saying related to
the new header structure at all? What "header magic" is it
you are talking about? Header forwarding is not magic at all.
People do it all the time. I'm confused. More confused
than ever. If it is the new features and names you are
complaining about, then this is the wrong thread. This thread
is about Robert's assertion that the new header structure causes
breakage. If it is the new names you are complaining about, I
won't comment further on it as I've said enough in the other threads.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk