Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] Review
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-04 12:33:54
On Dec 4, 2009, at 7:37 AM, Phil Endecott wrote:
> David Bergman wrote:
>> How do you think it feels for new Boost users to encounter two libraries with virtually identical use and interface? I think that is a bad thing in itself, and makes Boost look less coherent. I.e., if these two libraries were up for review now, would we accept them both?
> This was discussed just recently in the two geometry library reviews (both accepted) and the majority view was that it is a good thing to have many libraries even if they overlap.
MSM and Statechart do not merely overlap, the do the exact same thing: letting the developer specify and execute a state machine.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk