Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] Review
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-07 19:26:57
On Dec 7, 2009, at 3:05 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:21 AM, David Bergman wrote:
>>> I enjoy being critical of things I like, which is why I always
>>> criticize my wife.
>> That'll get you far; take it from me.
>> For what it's worth, I think that, to the extent that having a
>> library accepted at Boost is a disincentive to developing better
>> libraries in the same domain, we have a problem. I don't mind you
>> asking the question "should there be multiple libraries in the same
>> domain?" My answer is yes.
> To me the question is simple - should MSM be accepted into boost.
I agree, but for me the fact that there is a library in Boost fulfilling most of my FSM needs is a factor in that decision. I do not understand why this is regarded so outrageous.
> The other question - should state chart be deprecated - is really
> a different question. Discussion of this question isn't really related
> to the review of MSM. That is, the answer to the second really
> doesn't impact the first. Confusing these to issues doesn't really
> help the review of MSM.
I do not confuse these matters, just have a different take on multiplicities of domains in Boost than yours, or Dave's.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk