on Mon Jan 26 2009, Barend Gehrels <barend-AT-geodan.nl> wrote:
Mathias Gaunard wrote:
Anis Benyelloul wrote:
Boost.Geom purpose is to provide a unified, zero-cost and pretty interface around existing geometric primitive implementations (for now only points and rectangles in 2D and 3D).
There are geometric frameworks in the work from several people. Those work with concepts.
Among other things, you can manipulate different types with the same interface, using retroactive modelling. Right, this is the fourth one within a year. We will send our new preview this month or start of February. It is fairly complete now and revised by input from the list again.
Question, related to this. Until now we didn't use the name "boost" on it or use namespace "boost" inside, just because it is not accepted or reviewed. We only state "proposed to boost" on the website.
Thank you very much for being so responsible.
I've seen several libraries, and this one as well, immediately using the tag :boost" at first gauging of interest. What is the policy there? Are we encouraged to do this as well or is it better to wait if / until it is accepted?
If you want, you can use "Boost" as long as you add a loud disclaimer stating that it's not an accepted library. However, I'm neither encouraging nor discouraging that practice. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com