Re: [boost] [msm] Review

Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] Review
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-04 02:58:15

David Bergman wrote:
> To anything, really? In fact, a hypothetical positive answer to that question would indicate that MSM is as good or better*, ignoring compiler limitations. Come on, folks, let us face it: we are about to have two *very* similar FSM libraries here, so it should be fair to ask whether one is - feature-wise - better* than the other. No? We do not have this much overlap in any other library w.r.t. features and interface. We have the Spirit/Regex overlap, but that overlap is only partial, and Spirit handles more while Regex handles the intersection (arguably) in a simpler manner. Definitely simpler for developers not used to embedded DSLs in C++.
>
> * - yes, I did use a subjective term
>   
This seems much like the discussion just had exhaustively about the 
geometry libraries, and I don't suspect that it will be anymore 
fruitful.  I, for one, wouldn't mind skipping it if it's all the same to 
anyone else!  <grin;>

best regards,

Patrick