Rob Stewart-6 wrote
When interviewing C++ developers, I find those using Boost libraries, at least beyond shared_ptr, are rare. The brand is known by relatively few, and it is used, to any significant extent, by fewer still. That implies the need to grow our ranks through some form of advertising.
To me this is a huge issue. I see huge opportunities for improvement in the standard of coding and software design of C++ software. I'm familiar with other programming systems and I found they all pale in comparison to the power of C++ in abstraction and development. C++ is not without it's problems however. Without into them, I can say that I see a huge need and opportunity for Boost to move beyond backfilling the standard library into the promotion/education/demonstration of how programming really should be. Rather than hacking together all sorts of stuff and adding a layer of tests to flush out the design problems, as has been done for the last 40 years, I want to encourage more intentional formal design - not just by experts but by "the rest of us". The incubator is much more than a common facade over a few libraries. It is meant to show how quality software should be built. Right now, it has only my own views on this - lol - but no one has criticized them. I've always felt that Boost was great - but could be a lot better. I want to promote a higher standard - especially in the area of documentation, design, usability, corrections, etc for boost and by implication the rest of the world. I am not modest. It's a work in progress - but I think I'm on the correct path. Anyone who shares this vision is free to get on board. Robert Ramey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Incubator-Status-Report-tp4668747p4... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.