Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Daniel James (daniel_james_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-09 10:18:10
2009/6/9 Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]>:
> Daniel James skrev:
>> OK. This thread suggests that a 'system that supports DirectX
>> development' would be rejected.
Because most people seem to be against it? I deliberately said that
this thread suggests that it would be rejected - not that it is
'against the rules' or that I would vote against it. I'm more
interested in people's interpretation of how boost works.
It also doesn't help that the proposer doesn't value diplomacy.
> How many of those with negative comments are actually using direct x?
The negative comments are almost uniformly about the suitability of a
library that's tied to a third party non-portable library. I don't
recall anyone criticizing the quality of direct x.
> I personally think it would be a ice addition to boost, if it adds true
The best way to show that would be to post an encouraging response to
the original post.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk