Subject: Re: [boost] Shouldn't both logging proposals be reviewed in the same formal review?
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-18 09:11:16
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> Markus Werle wrote:
> > Only after intensive use we will find all the odds.
> And have years of lots of users feedback to refinement/development.
> > And: I'd prefer 2 boost libraries of the same kind over none.
Knowing there are, or likely will be, multiple libraries for similar purposes, the documentation of each must clearly describe the purpose, applicability, goals, and relative merits. IOW, each such library must do an outstanding job of assisting potential users in choosing among the competitors. Given that information, if users prefer one over the others, then it is clearly the winner and then Boost must decide how to deprecate and eventually remove the losers. If users talk of blending features, then merging libraries -- or at least portions thereof -- should be considered by the authors/maintainers, which will also lead to deprecating and removing the other libraries.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk