Re: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?

Subject: Re: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-01 08:44:25

_____________________
Vicente Juan Botet Escribá
http://viboes.blogspot.com/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Jones" <robertgbjones_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?

> 
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Roshan Naik <roshan_naik_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> I'm not at all up to speed on LP, so forgive me if I've missed the point! I
> can
> see that Castor is a splendid and useful library, entirely in its own right,
> but
> I'm not clear why you feel it's an appropriate candidate for inclusion in
> Boost.
> 
> On reflection it comes down to the question of what Boost is. Do domain
> specific
> libraries of all sorts have a home here (for which I guess examples would
> include
> the BGL), or is Boost more about a general programming toolkit (for example
> Boost.Bind). I don't know the answer to that, not do I feel qualified to
> make any
> judgement.

Boost includes already domain specific libraries as: Math, BGL, uBLAS, GIL and Spirit, the new libraries
Geometry, Polygon, UUID and other proposed as Static Size Linear Algebra, Lexer, Join. Do you think that some of these libraries should't be in Boost because they are domain specific?

I don't see how a library that propose unification and backtracking (LP) could not be considered for review. Why you feel it isn't an appropriate candidate for inclusion in Boost?

Best,
_____________________
Vicente Juan Botet Escribá
http://viboes.blogspot.com/