Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal/InterestCheck: Boost.Geom
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-26 13:09:32

on Mon Jan 26 2009, Barend Gehrels <> wrote:

> Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>> Anis Benyelloul wrote:
>>> Boost.Geom purpose is to provide a unified, zero-cost and pretty interface
>>> around existing geometric primitive implementations (for now only points and
>>> rectangles in 2D and 3D).
>> There are geometric frameworks in the work from several people.
>> Those work with concepts.
>> Among other things, you can manipulate different types with the same interface,
>> using retroactive modelling.
> Right, this is the fourth one within a year. We will send our new preview this month
> or start of February. It is fairly complete now and revised by input from the list
> again.
> Question, related to this. Until now we didn't use the name "boost" on it or use
> namespace "boost" inside, just because it is not accepted or reviewed. We only state
> "proposed to boost" on the website.

Thank you very much for being so responsible.

> I've seen several libraries, and this one as well, immediately using
> the tag :boost" at first gauging of interest. What is the policy
> there? Are we encouraged to do this as well or is it better to wait if
> / until it is accepted?

If you want, you can use "Boost" as long as you add a loud disclaimer
stating that it's not an accepted library. However, I'm neither
encouraging nor discouraging that practice.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

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