Subject: Re: [boost] [Christian S] Spirit and ANTLR - Request for example
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-09 13:03:24
On Jun 9, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>> I for one intend to read or respond to no more of your posts. Your
>> clearly indicate that don't want to be part of this community, so
>> you are
>> wasting my time.
> I was asked for my opinion of Spirit. I think it's fine, but I also
> that the C++ compiler was not meant to be a language tool.
> Disregard me as you wish,
Christian, what are you trying to achieve here? There are a lot of
experienced and skilled, and some are just outright smart ;-) , people
on this list. You do not have to bow to the "gods of Boost" as you
stated it, but definitely show respect for other people. I think your
proposed "best practices" library is completely outside the Boost
scope, and explained why I think it is so in a few posts. Everybody
else who have spoken, with the exception of Thorsten, seem to agree.
The thing is that neither of us used the word "silly" about either
your creation or you. Some might start to do that, though, if you
continue your quest of "telling the truth."
I think C++ (and even C) indeed was meant to be a "language tool", in
the sense of providing the bare necessities but complete power instead
of being bulky per se, but I think most Boosters understand that Boost
is stretching the limits of the template system, and are equally
frustrated as you with the poor error messages one gets deep down a
template instantiation. That is why BCCL was a welcome addition to the
growing Boost family.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk