Re: [boost] boost::directx?

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-08 21:20:20

On Jun 8, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:

>> The bulk are generic language-lifting tools, basically giving the
>> programmer a greater vocabulary. And, even if I bashed math libraries
>> a bit, I would classify the current (as of 1.39.0) libraries as  
>> (and I
>> did go through each library, and might have counted wrong with a few
>> units here and there):
>>
>> 1. Language Extensions - 60   (including Statechart and BGL, which  
>> are
>> applicable much more often than the developer realizes)
>>
>> 2. Common Types & Features (often part of newer languages standard
>> libraries) - 8   (Accumulate, Numeric Conversion, Date, Format,
>> Random, Regex, Serialization, Xpressive)
>>
>> 3. OS Abstraction Layer  - 8   (Filesystem, Asio, Interprocess,
>> Iostreams, Pool, System, Thread, Timer)
>>
>> 4. Math - 8  (Interval, various Math libraries, Rational)
>>
>> 5. Other Specialized - 7   (CRC, GIL, MPI, Proto, Python, Spirit,
>> uBLAS, Units)
>>
>> The first two categories can be characterized as bringing the  
>> language
>> of C++ up to (and beyond) that of newer creations, where the third
>> category is often part of such a standard library. The number of
>> libraries belonging to those three categories is 76.
>>
>> The latter two categories are clearly domain-specific, though. The
>> number of such libraries is 15.
>
> I know, it's off-topic, but for the records: IMHO, neither Spirit  
> nor Proto
> are anything but domain specific libraries.
> Both are _generic_ tools usable in almost any application domain.

I agree, but wanted to rather be biased toward that "dark domain- 
specific" side to make my point :-) And, I actually put "Spirit" in  
category #2 when counting.

/David