Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-08 19:51:28

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>> I haven't followed the discussion and I apologize if I'm repeating
>> something, but in my mind if three is a useful library A, and if we
>> could provide a layer (wrapping?) which makes library A work better
>> with Boost, the only question should be how popular library A is, and
>> how many of library A's users would benefit from an easier Boost
>> integration.
> That's perfectly true if the question is whether such a wrapper
> should be created, but...
>> Specifically, what platforms that library runs on is not important.
> Portability is important for deciding whether to include such a wrapper
> in Boost.  From the requirements:
> "A library's interface must portable.... If a portable implementation is
> not possible, non-portable constructions are acceptable /if reasonably
> easy to port to other environments/..." [emphasis mine]

In this context, the wrapper I was talking about would be the Boost
library. The requirements simply state that that wrapper should be
portable, that's fine.

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.

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