Subject: Re: [boost] Scalpel: a Spirit&Wave-powered C++ source code analysis library
From: Florian Goujeon (florian.goujeon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-03 18:22:06
On 09/03/2010 05:04 PM, Doug Gregor wrote:
> Having a good, open-source C++ parser library that could support such
> tools would be wonderful. However, I am going to be a stick-in-the-mud
> and propose that we already have such a library. Clang:
> I strongly encourage you not to begin yet another
> open-source C++ parser.
Before I started this project two years ago, I obviously checked
whether there was any similar C++ source code analysis library
project. However, I didn't find anything.
In the meantime, I did discover the existence of Clang, but I already
spent a lot of time working on Scalpel. I must confess it was a pretty
bad news for me, but I've decided to carry on in spite of it.
After all, compared with the G++ front-end, Clang is yet another
open-source C++ parser as well. Similarly, LLVM is yet another
open-source compiler compared with GCC, ArchLinux is yet another
GNU/Linux distro compared with Debian, and so on.
All competition is stimulating. It's beneficial for everyone. All
competitors are different from each other and aim to bring a surplus
value. As I said, Scalpel brings high homogeneity with Boost. It has
its own unique design and I also plan to endow it with round-trip
I've been working on Scalpel for two years and I strongly intend to
complete it. Even more so, I encourage developers to contribute to the
open-source software's diversity!
>  Scalpel appears to be under an LGPL license, which is not Boost-compatible.
In the beginning, Scalpel was under GPL. Hartmut Kaiser, Joel de
Guzman and some fellows of mine convinced me to switch under a more
liberal software license. Then, I've switched to LGPL.
If one day Scalpel is accepted into Boost, I'll release it under the
BSL without any hesitation.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk