Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Gevorg Voskanyan (v_gevorg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-07 10:33:22
Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> DirectX doesn't need to be "wrapped", other than maybe using com_ptr.
> That is not my point.
> My point is that there are structures and techniques that are general and
> useful for DirectX coders. These things should be in a common namespace.
> Denying this reality does nothing but remove boost from reality.
I don't think anyone denies that. What we don't seem to agree on is whether that common namespace should start with ::boost::
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk