Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Gevorg Voskanyan (v_gevorg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-07 09:37:25
Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> Hi Gevorg,
> I agree that in terms of "being eventually accepted as a C++ standard", any
> idea of boost::microsoft or boost::directx is deemed to fail.
> However, there are many boost libraries that currently exist and have no
> chance in hell of being accepted into the C++ standard.
Yes, there are such libraries in boost, but the reasons they are not going into standard are different. Some of them are simply superseded by language features, like boost.assign and boost.concept_check. Others (most?) are not mature enough and/or established practice yet to be proposed for standards commitee consideration, but have no fundamental reason they can't be ready for that at some future point. The few others left - boost.mpi and boost.python come to mind, are unlikely to ever make their way into the C++ standard, I agree, but they are at least portable and wrap non-proprietary interfaces.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk