Re: [boost] [msm] Review

Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] Review
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-03 17:08:43

David Bergman wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Christophe Henry wrote:
> I have two (harsh?) questions to this community:
>
> 1. Is there a Boost library removal process, so that one can at least
> mark a library as deprecated? The duality, sort of, to the acceptance
> process.

There isn't - and there shouldn't be. Once one employs a library
in a real program, he has to be sure that it's going to be around
an indefinate amount of time. Otherwise, the maintainence
of the application which uses it isn't under control of application
developer anymore.

One could suggest that there be a process of "recommendation"
but that's going to be pretty subjective.  I think this should
be handled in a way that boost doesn't currently provide for.

> 2. *If* (i) MSM were part of Boost before Statechart and (ii)
> compilers could handle massive transition tables (in the order of a
> few hundred transitions), would Statechart have been accepted?

I don't think the answer to that question is relevant to anything.

Personally I don't see any problem in having more than one
library address the same problem as long as they are different
in some substantive way.

>> I love C++ :)

I'm sure we all do.

> I am certain that C++ loves you back, Cristophe.

I'm not so certain about this at least in my personal case.

Robert Ramey