- Boost - lists.boost.org

The Master branch is now CLOSED for the beta release
by Marshall Clow 05 Mar '26

05 Mar '26

Please do not commit or merge to the master branch The Beta RC1s will be available later today. — The release managers.

1 0

Master branch closes for the 1.91 beta TOMORROW
by Marshall Clow 03 Mar '26

03 Mar '26

Calendar is here: https://www.boost.org/calendar/ — The release managers

1 0

Boost.Test, link=shared, and main
by Peter Dimov 27 Feb '26

27 Feb '26

Some libraries (e.g. Proto until yesterday, Range, Xpressive) have test .cpp files that look like this: #include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp> void my_test_function() { // tests here } boost::unit_test::test_suite* init_unit_test_suite(int argc, char* argv[]) { boost::unit_test::test_suite* test = BOOST_TEST_SUITE( "my test suite name" ); test->add( BOOST_TEST_CASE( &my_test_function ) ); return test; } This works when Boost.Test is linked as a static library, because it then supplies a `main` function. It doesn't link with link=shared, because then there's no `main`. What's the easiest, least invasive, way to make this work with link=shared? In principle, one is supposed to define BOOST_TEST_MAIN. But this doesn't work, because when BOOST_TEST_MAIN is defined, Boost.Test defines not just `main`, but `init_unit_test_suite` as well. And defining `main` also doesn't work, because when using shared linking, Boost.Test automatically defines BOOST_TEST_ALTERNATIVE_INIT_API, which changes the expected signature of init_unit_test_suite to one returning not boost::unit_test::test_suite* but bool. The current tests work around this by using <link>static as a requirement in test/Jamfile, but this has become a problem when testing with CMake since I added these libraries there. Testing Boost with BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON now doesn't work. (I updated the Proto tests to use BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE instead and this works, but is (a) too much work and (b) error prone. There should be an easier way to support the above use.)

1 0

Boost 1.91.0 closing for major changes on WEDNESDSAY
by Marshall Clow 24 Feb '26

24 Feb '26

Calendar is here: https://www.boost.org/calendar/

1 0

Building boost-python for pyodide/emscripten
by fxcoudert＠ik.me 23 Feb '26

23 Feb '26

Hello, I'm working on adding boost-python to the pyodide distribution (https://github.com/pyodide/pyodide-recipes/pull/513) i.e., compile boost-python with emscripten. My bootstrap command is: ./bootstrap.sh --prefix=${INSTALL_DIR} --with-libraries=python --with-python=python$PYMAJOR.$PYMINOR It seems to detect the Python install in the correct env: Detecting Python version... 3.13 Detecting Python root... /home/runner/miniconda3/envs/pyodide-env The b2 command is a bit more complex, but it works for a lot of other boost libraries: ./b2 variant=release toolset=clang-emscripten link=static threading=single --disable-icu \ cxxflags="$SIDE_MODULE_CXXFLAGS -fwasm-exceptions -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS=1" \ cflags="$SIDE_MODULE_CFLAGS -fwasm-exceptions -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS=1" \ linkflags="-fpic $SIDE_MODULE_LDFLAGS" \ python=$PYMAJOR.$PYMINOR \ --layout=system -j"${PYODIDE_JOBS:-3}" --prefix=${INSTALL_DIR} \ -d2 install It says: - python : building which seems good, but then the only thing it installs are cmake files: /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib/cmake /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib/cmake/Boost -1.84.0 /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib/cmake/Boost -1.84.0/BoostConfigVersion.cmake /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib/cmake/Boost -1.84.0/BoostConfig.cmake /home/runner/work/pyodide-recipes/pyodide-recipes/packages/.libs/lib/cmake/Boost DetectToolset-1.84.0.cmake The libraries I expect, libboost_python and the numpy module, are not installed. I don't think they're compiled at all, but there is no error. Do you have any idea what I am missing? Thanks, FX

1 0

Capy: Request for endorsements
by Vinnie Falco 20 Feb '26

20 Feb '26

Hi. We are proposing a new library "Capy" as a candidate library and seeking endorsements for formal review: https://github.com/cppalliance/capy https://master.capy.cpp.al/capy/index.html This library provides facilities which use C++20 coroutines to perform I/O. It is not a networking library, yet it is the perfect foundation upon which networking libraries, or any libraries that perform I/O, may be built. It introduces concepts for representing buffers of data, and moving those buffers of data through processing pipelines driven entirely by C++20 coroutines. The design of the library is based on one simple observation from Peter Dimov: An API designed from the ground up to use C++20 coroutines can achieve performance and ergonomics which cannot otherwise be obtained. Capy is currently the foundation for another new library (not yet proposed) called "Corosio" https://github.com/cppalliance/corosio https://master.corosio.cpp.al/corosio/index.html Corosio is a complete portable networking library which is built on the facilities that Capy offers. We intend to propose this library soon as the successor to the immensely popular Boost.Asio library. Capy is also the foundation for yet another new library (not yet proposed) called "Http" https://github.com/cppalliance/http https://master.http.cpp.al/http/index.html The Http library uses Capy, yet does not use Corosio. That is because Http is "Sans/IO." It provides the algorithms and data structures which implement the HTTP protocol at a high level, while remaining agnostic to the particular network implementation. This is possible thanks to the powerful stream abstractions which Capy offers. Capy is also used by Beast2, which is yet another new library (not yet proposed) and also the name for a family of libraries: https://github.com/cppalliance/beast2 Beast2 uses the Capy, Corosio, and Http libraries to implement high-level HTTP servers written in a C++ version of Express JS routers. This is the successor to Boost.Beast (which will continue to be maintained independently ). The Beast2 family of libraries includes: Capy — The library currently being proposed, the foundation of I/O. Corosio — Coroutine-only portable networking. This is the successor to Boost.Asio. Http — Sans-I/O HTTP/1.1. This is a high-level library: servers, clients, Express JS middleware. Websocket — Sans-I/O Websocket. This is also a high-level library. Beast2 — High-level HTTP and WebSocket servers. Express.js-style routing Burl — High-level HTTP client. curl features, coroutine ergonomics of coroutines, and Python Requests inspired API Currently, the C++ Standard does not deliver facilities optimized for networking I/O. We believe that Capy should become a standard library component to fill this gap. Our first paper based on Capy, introduces the " IoAwaitable" family of concepts: https://github.com/cppalliance/wg21-papers/blob/master/source/d4003-io-awai… The Beman Way We are bringing Capy to Boost because this is what Boost was created for. The project exists to incubate high-quality libraries destined for standardization. Beman Dawes founded Boost on the principle that the best path to the standard is through proven practice: build it, ship it, let users depend on it, learn from real-world feedback, then propose standardization. Smart pointers, regular expressions, filesystem, threading primitives—all followed this path from Boost to the standard library. Capy represents Boost returning to its role as a leader in C++ standardization efforts. The library addresses a real gap in C++26: there is no standard foundation optimized for coroutine-based I/O. Rather than waiting for a committee to design something in the abstract, or adapting networking to a framework built for different requirements, Capy takes the proven approach. It exists. It works. It powers real networking code today. Now it needs the scrutiny and refinement that only the Boost review process can provide. The Problem Capy Solves When an I/O operation completes, the operating system wakes up some thread, such as a completion port thread, an epoll reactor, or an io_uring worker. Without affinity tracking, your coroutine resumes on that arbitrary thread, forcing you to add synchronization everywhere or risk data races. This is the fundamental problem that coroutine-based networking must solve. Capy's answer is the IoAwaitable protocol. When you launch a coroutine with a designated executor, every child coroutine inherits that executor affinity automatically. Execution context flows forward through `co_await` chains, not backward through P3826 queries, to ensure every coroutine in the chain runs in the same context. When I/O completes on some OS thread, the IoAwaitable protocol ensures your coroutine resumes on its designated executor. The data flow is explicit and testable. There are no thread-local globals, no implicit context, no surprises. Capy's `task` type uses the compiler to enforce invariants. Cancellation follows the same forward-propagation model. Stop tokens flow forward from the launch of a coroutine chain alongside the execution context, to arrive at the platform API boundary, providing a uniform cancellation interface across all operations. Frame allocation is where coroutine overhead traditionally hurts performance. Capy addresses this with thread-local recycling pools that achieve zero steady-state allocations after warmup. The coroutine launch site controls allocation policy, enabling per-deployment customization: bounded pools for real-time systems, per-tenant budgets for multi-tenant servers, or tracking allocators for debugging. Buffer handling is essential for networking, and Asio's twenty five years of experience showed us how. Capy provides buffer sequence algorithms: think `std::ranges` but for buffers. These are the vocabulary types and operations that networking code needs: slicing, copying, concatenating, and iterating over discontiguous memory. One million scatter/gather buffers, if you will. The design is driven by real-world usage, not theoretical completeness. Capy is opinionated on the things that matter for I/O: - An executor model for coroutine affinity and completion dispatch - Stop token integration: uniform cancellation, always available - Allocator control over frame allocation with zero-overhead recycling - Forward propagation of the full context through every `co_await` - A `task` type that enforces the _IoAwaitable_ protocol at compile time - Composition primitives for launching and coordinating coroutines - A strand for safe concurrency without mutexes - Buffer sequences: `std::ranges` for untyped bytes - Type erasure by default: no combinatorial explosion of templates Proven Through Corosio Capy is not speculation. It powers Corosio, a coroutine-only networking library that we are developing together. Corosio provides real sockets, acceptors, TLS streams, timers, DNS resolution, and multiple implementations of SSL streams, all built on Capy's foundation. This is the successor library to the incredibly popular Boost.Asio. It demonstrates what networking could look like if designed for coroutines from the start rather than adapted from callback-based models. The standardization strategy follows from this layering. Capy is the foundation piece that belongs in the standard: executor model, task types, buffer algorithms, cancellation integration. These are stable abstractions that networking libraries can build upon. Corosio, the networking piece, can remain outside the standard to mitigate risk: sockets and protocol implementations typically experience difficulty achieving consensus even after years of committee attention. Corosio can mature externally where it can evolve based on user feedback, while Capy provides the stable foundation that the standard library lacks. Call to Action We are requesting endorsements from Boost members to proceed with formal review. If you believe that Boost should provide a foundation for coroutine-based I/O—and that proven practice is the right path to standardization, your endorsement would be welcomed. The team is also happy to receive feedback on the design, the implementation, and the documentation. The library is ready for serious evaluation. Clone it, build it, write code against it, and tell us what works and what does not. This is Boost doing what Boost does best: building the libraries that C++ needs, proving them in practice, and paving the way for standardization. Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file [LICENSE_1_0.txt](LICENSE_1_0.txt) or copy at https://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)

18 66

Porting Boost.Redis to Corosio and Capy
by Ruben Perez 19 Feb '26

19 Feb '26

Hi all, As you might remember, last week I endorsed Vinnie's Capy+Corosio submission and promised to talk about how I had managed to port Boost.Redis to use these libraries [1] [2]. This is the post. It's somehow a mini-review. Warning label: it might be a little lengthy. Disclaimer: I'm affiliated with the C++ Alliance. I'm trying to write this as a potential user, rather than as an Alliance member. Why Boost-Redis =============== As you might know, I authored Boost.MySQL and co-maintain Boost.Redis with Marcelo. I chose Boost.Redis because it has a smaller API surface than MySQL, while still exercising similar functionality regarding networking. Note that Boost.Redis is a high-level library. In addition to parsing and serializing messages, it manages connection lifecycle, automatically reconnects on failure, pipelines multiple requests into a single round trip when possible, and handles health-check pings to detect dead connections. Library requirements ==================== A library like this requires lots of networking and concurrency primitives, like: * Reading and writing data. * Establishing TCP connections. * Establishing UNIX domain socket connections. * TLS. * Cancellation. * Running tasks in parallel. * Waiting for events to happen (e.g. "block my task until the user submits a new request"). * Waiting periods of time (timers). * Setting timeouts to operations. Some of these primitives (like timers) are only present in Corosio, so using Capy alone isn't an option. This is one of the reasons why I endorse having them reviewed together. I understand the rationale behind keeping them separate, but users like me benefit the most if both of them are present. Porting strategy ================ If you've ever written universal Asio async operations, you might know that Asio's composition mechanism, async_compose, is hard. It works, but it leads to heavily templated code, lengthy compiler errors, and code difficult to test. For this reason, most of Boost.Redis code today is written as finite-state machines (FSMs) that decouple logic from I/O. The FSM is a hand-wired generator that yields actions (i.e. "what should I do next? read from the server? write data? wait?"). The I/O layer just executes these actions. [3] is the FSM for the task that reads data from the server, with [4] being its I/O layer. This is the code as it is today. This disposition has made the port pretty straightforward. You just need to replace the I/O layer with Corosio's primitives and go. The reader becomes [5]. Code managing connection establishment required slightly more work, but nothing unsurmountable. I've ported some integration tests, too [9] to prove that the port works. There is still much to do on my side here, though. The port is currently functional, but it could use some refactoring. Coroutines enable separate compilation where universal Asio doesn't, and we could make improvements here. More on this later though. Mapping Asio to Capy/Corosio ============================ Let's go over the primitives I've exercised and how well things have gone. * Reading and writing data: I'd say this is Capy's specialty. Primitives map cleanly. Capy has a clean stream model here, with optional type erasure, that makes things simple. Nothing to object. * Establishing TCP connections: most of it maps well. Some considerations here: * You need Corosio to achieve this. With the current design, I think this is reasonable today. * Only IPv4 is currently supported [6]. Socket opening semantics need better definition. * Range connect [7] is missing [8]. This is practical because hostname resolutions yields a range of endpoints, rather than a single one. This is however trivially implementable by users thanks to coroutines, so it isn't critical. * Establishing UNIX domain socket connections: this is not supported at the moment [10]. * TLS. I'm particularly happy here. Corosio defines a tls_stream base class, with concrete implementations, like openssl_stream or wolfssl_stream. This traditional OOP approach is possible because of coroutines. Many of our users run Redis in trusted networks, inside Docker containers, over plain TCP. They shouldn't have to link OpenSSL if they don't use it. In the current Asio-based version, this is not possible without heavy templating or config macros. We've been requested to implement this a number of times, but it's ugly. With Corosio we could do it. * Cancellation. Capy's model here is simpler than Asio's: * Asio has three cancellation types with potentially different semantics: terminal, partial and total. Capy has just one. I think this is the right choice. None of the libraries I work on really require more than this. And uncommon cases can be modeled as a combination of when_all, when_any, and async_event primitives. * Asio's cancellation handlers are stateless. Cancellation state is held by async_compose. Cancellation state is required because a cancellation might arrive after an operation finishes, but before its completion handler runs. The consequence is that you need to check your operation's cancellation state manually after every async primitive. If you forget one, you get an insidious bug [11]. Capy cancellation uses std::stop_token, which is stateful. This mostly removes this problem, which is good. * Asio's cancellation handlers are not thread-safe by default. This leads to insidious surprises. Capy cancellation is thread-safe by default. I don't know if there is any performance penalty here, but it's probably the best choice. * Note: correct and universal cancellation semantics are mandatory to get the next point right. Primitives like when_any don't make sense if one of the operations can't be reliably cancelled. * Running tasks in parallel. Also happy here. Capy has when_any and when_all, similar to Asio's parallel groups. Parallel groups in Asio are still experimental and may create problems with certain config macros, so it's a win here, too. * Note: when_any and when_all are actually a subset of what can be achieved with Asio's parallel group. I don't think this is a problem though. It is the most useful subset. Anything else can be expressed in terms of them + async_event. * Synchronization primitives (i.e. "waiting for events to happen"). Capy has async_mutex [12] and async_event [13]. Asio has none of these, and you need to either implement them using channels (experimental), or timers (you set the timer expiration to infinity, then cancel the timer to signal the event). These are both workarounds and don't capture user intention. I can't stress enough the importance of having a working async_event, especially for higher-level libraries like Redis. It's a fundamental building block. * Waiting periods of time (timers). These are similar to Asio's steady_timer. Other timer types are not supported. None of the libraries I work on need anything else, so I'm satisfied. * Something I'd explore is a standalone sleep(steady_clock::duration) function. It might be ergonomic in some cases. * Setting timeouts to operations. Asio implements this with the cancel_after [14] and cancel_at [15] completion tokens, which we use in Redis. These are absent from Corosio [16]. I've done a quick-and-dirty implementation [17], but this should be extended by the library to support custom awaitables (and not only capy::task). Separate compilation ==================== One of the key benefits of the proposed model is separate compilation (note how the port's connection implementation lives in an .ipp file, which ends up in a single TU). The libraries have no config macros, which I like. Having them creates a lot of problems for separate compilation (this is why we have .ipp files instead of regular TUs in Redis today). Type erasure has probably some performance implications, which I haven't evaluated. A database library like Boost.Redis is probably not going to see any significant impact here. We get performance from reducing round-trips to the server. This kind of performance impact is probably more relevant to domains like high-frequency trading, but I can't add anything here. Error handling ============== Asio has a built-in error_code to exception transformation. If you have an async_write operation accepting a completion handler of void(error_code, std::size_t), when using coroutines, you get: // error_code is swallowed. This throws if the error_code indicates failure std::size_t bytes = co_await async_write(...); This is good for tutorials but probably not what you want for production, since I/O errors are not exceptional. So you end up writing: // doesn't throw, check ec manually auto [ec, bytes ] = co_await async_write(..., asio::as_tuple); Capy doesn't support this. I think this is the right choice, because it's simpler and leads to code following best practice. Executors and associated properties =================================== In Asio, every completion token has a set of associated properties: executor, immediate executor, allocator and cancellation slot. When writing composed operations, you need to make sure to propagate this. This is not trivial with callbacks, since passing a lambda by default doesn't achieve it. Capy stores most of this in a an io_env structure. Task frames hold a pointer to such structure. The result is that propagation happens by default. I haven't had to think much about this, which is a good sign. Capy has functions to launch coroutines with a different environment. I haven't had to use these yet, but I will likely need them when writing multi-threaded examples for Redis. Having them is required. Windows-specific I/O ==================== While Redis doesn't, MySQL supports communication over Windows named pipes. We don't have this working in Boost.MySQL yet, but Asio's windows::stream_handle [18] probably helps here. It's not a high-priority thing, but it would be nice having it on the horizon. Buffers ======= Capy provides many utilities to work with buffers. I think the most useful utilities here are the concrete buffer types, like beyond my needs, but I want to highlight the concrete buffer types, like circular_dynamic_buffer [19]. I miss here an equivalent to Beast's flat_buffer [20] [23]. At the moment, concrete buffer types are: * circular_dynamic_buffer. As I said, very useful. * flat_dynamic_buffer. This is non-allocating, and never frees space with memmove. This is a problem if the server sends a stream of small messages, since there is no guarantee of message boundaries. * dynamic_string_buffer and dynamic_vector_buffer. These are similar to Asio's. Protocols handling many small messages can't use these because they cause data to move with every consumed message. Buffer sequence type erasure is split between Corosio and Capy. There are two classes doing essentially the same job, and when I tried to write a generator that returns a buffer sequence as a concrete type, I found the story fragmented. A single unified type would simplify things. I don't have a strong opinion on where it should live, but having one answer instead of two would help. Asio interoperability ===================== The ASIO interop layer has friction. The executor adapter translates a dispatch call into an `async_post` internally [22], which isn't correct. When you dispatch in ASIO, the expectation is that if you're already on the right executor, the function runs inline. Turning that into a post adds unnecessary overhead and breaks the expected semantics. The boundary between ASIO and Corosio needs to be smoother if we want incremental adoption, and we do want incremental adoption because no one is going to rewrite their entire stack at once. Final thoughts ============== The port succeeded, and this is enough to earn my endorsement. Most coroutine code is cleaner than the one written for universal Asio, which is good. I've found bugs, but Vinnie's team has addressed them already. I intend to port the rest of the tests and likely Boost.MySQL at some point, which will exercise more parts of the API. I hope to see these libraries in Boost in the future. Congratulations reading (or skipping) until here, you're a really tenacious reader. Regards, Ruben. [1] https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/boost@lists.boost.org/thread/DNTZBH7O… [2] https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/tree/feature/corosio [3] https://github.com/boostorg/redis/blob/b7b93c96dae038f7817d653a35e7225b83d3… [4] https://github.com/boostorg/redis/blob/b7b93c96dae038f7817d653a35e7225b83d3… [5] https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/16464517dc1b47107504b0d9480548… [6] https://github.com/cppalliance/corosio/issues/128 [7] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/doc/html/boost_asio/reference/async_c… [8] https://github.com/cppalliance/corosio/issues/124 [9] https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/16464517dc1b47107504b0d9480548… [10] https://github.com/cppalliance/corosio/issues/122 [11] https://github.com/boostorg/mysql/issues/454 [12] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/blob/8bcc0fa3753d7ebf80f28379865d987e8d… [13] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/blob/8bcc0fa3753d7ebf80f28379865d987e8d… [14] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/doc/html/boost_asio/reference/cancel_… [15] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/doc/html/boost_asio/reference/cancel_… [16] https://github.com/cppalliance/corosio/issues/141 [17] https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/16464517dc1b47107504b0d9480548… [18] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/doc/html/boost_asio/reference/windows… [19] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/blob/8bcc0fa3753d7ebf80f28379865d987e8d… [20] https://github.com/boostorg/beast/blob/develop/include/boost/beast/core/fla… [21] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/blob/8bcc0fa3753d7ebf80f28379865d987e8d… [22] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/blob/8bcc0fa3753d7ebf80f28379865d987e8d… [23] https://github.com/cppalliance/capy/issues/168

3 2

Code coverage reports
by Sam Darwin 16 Feb '26

16 Feb '26

Still in development, but actually the first iteration is functional. Run coverage reports using gcovr + github pages. No Codecov. To explain more: imagine Codecov-like coverage reports, except they are built with an open source software tool "gcovr". Hosted on Github Pages, and you have potentially more control over the output, the steps, the appearance, etc. since the script is customizable. Instructions: https://github.com/boostorg/boost-ci/blob/master/docs/code-coverage.md

4 4

Capy and Corosio: my endorsement
by Ruben Perez 14 Feb '26

14 Feb '26

Hi all, I've recently been playing with the "Asio 2" libraries that Vinnie has proposed (Capy and Corosio). I've managed to port Boost.Redis to Corosio, with pretty good results. You can find my port here: https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/tree/feature/corosio Some particularly interesting files here: * Connection: much cleaner and no longer templated: https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/feature/corosio/include/boost/… * Connection implementation: https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/feature/corosio/include/boost/… * Usage example: https://github.com/anarthal/boost-redis/blob/feature/corosio/example/cpp20_… The port is functional (although still a prototype), and this alone makes me endorse the proposed libraries. If the libraries get to Boost, I will consider either offering a Capy/Corosio interface for Boost.Redis, or proposing the port as a new library (if Boost.Redis' author agrees). Disclaimer: I'm affiliated with the C++ Alliance. I'm trying to speak here as one of the maintainers of Boost.Redis and a potential user, rather than an employee. I intend to submit a more detailed report on my experience with the port next week, in case someone's interested. Thanks Vinnie for proposing the libraries. Regards, Ruben.

3 2

Re: Capy: Request for endorsements
by Richard 13 Feb '26

13 Feb '26

In article < <CA+EzHGceSqA12Ar_LAkx2VWH9=j522Dix1dCByDj1qHJEBvpvQ(a)mail.gmail.com>> you write: >I'm updating the endorsement request accordingly. If you believe Boost >should provide a coroutine-based I/O foundation and a networking library >built on top of it, your endorsement for a joint Capy + Corosio review >would be welcome. I would like to see such a review take place! -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

1 0