On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:13:51 -0600, Michael Goldshteyn wrote:
"Pavel Vozenilek" <pavel_vozenilek@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:dlee2r$99g$1@sea.gmane.org...
"Korcan Hussein" wrote:
FC++ being worked on (to be re-reviewed for boost in the not to distant > future?) FC++ was reviewed (cca year ago) with negative result. I am not sure how much of work has been done on it afterwards.
/Pavel
Do you or anyone else have any recollection on why it got a negative result to its review?
As well as the points Pavel makes, I seem to recall that a major strike against the FC++ library was that it was very slow compared to doing the equivalent thing with existing facilities. S> -- <<< Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines >>> 7:21pm up 43 days 2:55, 16 users, load average: 1.40, 1.07, 0.74 Registered Linux User #232457 | LFS ID 11703