Re: [boost] Demand for Boost libraries - was Math tools polynomial enhancements

Subject: Re: [boost] Demand for Boost libraries - was Math tools polynomial enhancements
From: Karen Shaeffer (shaeffer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-11-02 10:28:12

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 06:54:10AM -0800, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On 11/1/15 9:30 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> 
> >Perhaps because "concepts" are not part of C++ and unless concepts
> >become codified Boost authors have nothing to work with in adding
> >"concepts" to their library.
> 
> Sure they have something to work with.  The Boost Concepts Checking
> library has been available since 2002 !!!

Hi Robert,
The boost graph library and property_maps library make extensive use of
concepts. And most of these libraries were written between 1997 and 2001
in the c++98 dialect. Even though I strongly believe these important libraries
are begging for an updated version 2 written in c++14, they are a work of art
in my opinion. One can learn a lot by studying their implementations and
working with them. It's especially fun and instructive to write your own
algorithms.

Karen

> 
> And nothing would prevent library authors from including concepts in their
> documentation.
> 
> This of course is my main point.  If no one is interested in using what's
> currently available, how is making something else available going to make a
> difference?
> 
> Not even the boost review process insists that library authors use concepts
> in their documentation - and this has been around since the original SGI
> documentation from 1995 - 20 years ago.  CPP Reference uses concepts - but
> very little other documentation does.
> 
> Robert Ramey
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
--- end quoted text ---

-- 
Karen Shaeffer                 Be aware: If you see an obstacle in your path,
Neuralscape Services           that obstacle is your path.        Zen proverb