Re: [boost] C++ Manifesto

Subject: Re: [boost] C++ Manifesto
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-13 19:17:36

On Sep 13, 2009, at 3:33 PM, christophe henry wrote:

>
>> Why is there no Boost.ANTLR?
>
>
>
> Good question. I mean, if Spirit seems to you such a disservice to  
> the community that you write the xth post about it, why not show how  
> to do it right? I'm sure we would all benefit from it, because right  
> now, I haven't read anything constructive in this post.
>
> At least Joel spent lots of time to offer a great library to the C++  
> community and I think he deserves better than such unconclusive  
> criticism as "I think that it represents a disservice to the C++  
> community".
>
> Seeing from his user base, I respectfully allow myself some to  
> disagree on that point.
>
>
>
> Now the challenge is simple:
>
> Make it better and you'll earn yourself some respect.
>
> Don't provide any alternative and land from now on in my spam box.

I both agree and disagree with you - so I might up in your spam box as  
well ;-)

Well, I read the "Manifesto" as a way to say that Boost, and Spirit,  
for a particular(ly representative) example, is *too clever* and  
somehow saves "C++'s face" instead of us all (or some of us)  
abandoning that language in favor for one with more meta features  
being intrinsic to the language, such as D.

But, I agree that it would be better to provide that Boost.ANTLR  
(proposal) as part of the "Manifesto" ;-)

This is obviously getting pretty OT, but where should these meta  
discussions take place?

/David