Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-08 20:19:55

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM, David Bergman
<David.Bergman_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Jun 8, 2009, at 7:56 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 4:10 PM, David Bergman
>> <David.Bergman_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On Jun 8, 2009, at 6:58 PM, David Bergman wrote:
>>>> On Jun 8, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>>>>> Specifically, what platforms that library runs on is not important.
>>>> It is important to the ideal of Boost, in my humble opinion (and
>>>> interpretation of the stated goals of Boost.)
>>> My response sounded harsh. What I think I meant is what is stopping
>>> someone
>>> from creating a Boost-compatible and Boostesque wrapper for DirectX? Why
>>> must it be part of the Boost libraries?
>> You can ask this question for any Boost library: why should it be part of
>> Boost?
>> Presumably the answer is "because many programmers (Boost users) would
>> benefit from it."
> No. The answer is - or should be - because programmers can benefit from FOO
> on any platform and most types of applications, and FOO is in harmony with
> the goal of Boost and the existing libraries.
> I am not even super-happy about quite specific math libraries entering Boost
> now and then - ending up with a bunch of them.

The question is, do we or do we not allow domain-specific libraries in
Boost? I think that it is obvious that we do, there are quite a few of

We could say "OK, no more domain-specific libraries in
Boost!!!~!~1`~!!~111" but first we must formally define the domain of
libraries that are acceptable in Boost. Good luck with that. :)

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.

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