Re: [boost] boost::directx?

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-07 09:52:18

AMDG

Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> Hello Artyom,
>
>   
>> It is not about OpenGL, DirectX war, it is about Boost policy
>>     
>
> I fully grok boost's policies and ideas. If i wanted to be pendantic, I
> could name many cases where boosts' own primary policies have been bent, or
> broken.
>
> Boost is not set in stone. It came from the idea of helping people write
> good C++.
>
> That is the motivation behind my idea of having a boost::directx namespace.
>
> The hard reality is that a lot of people use C++ and DirectX. A lot of
> people use C++ *because* they use DirectX. Another group use DirectX because
> they use C++.
>
> Beyond all the formalities, I have to reduce myself to hand-waving. If you
> took a survey, in 2009 you will find that most people use C++ under Visual
> Studio. Fewer use linux-derivatives, and fewer again others use some custom
> vendors, but in reality, boost is addressing a Windows-oriented,
> performance-based audience.
>
> That is the reality.
>   

As far as I am concerned, any library that doesn't not
work on Linux/Windows/Mac is a non-starter for Boost.
If anything I believe that the official rule should be bent
towards being more strict than stated.

> That audience not only includes but primarily consists of game developers.
> And they all use DirectX.
>
> So.
>
> Do you want cast down righteous fire from the ivory tower, or do you want to
> help the coders make performant applications?
>   

Irrelevant.  The fact that a library would be useful to many people
does not imply that it belongs in Boost.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe