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++
> 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, 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?