In article <ulktwv10f.fsf@boost-consulting.com>, David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
Ben Artin <macdev@artins.org> writes:
So, here is one way that I see to resolve the property_trees conundrum:
This might be the best approach in the long run. However, IMO:
a. It's unlikely to happen unless this library is accepted into Boost, because it requires too much coordination among libraries with too much speculation: the serialization and program options authors are unlikely to have time to rework their libraries to support another library that *might*, someday, be accepted.
b. It shouldn't be a prerequisite for inclusion.
I agree on both counts. My main purpose was to clarify (IMO, anyway) some of the issues concerning scope overlap, and propose a general long-term direction -- in part to counterbalance the review discussion which has (IMO, again) had a very strong near-term focus. Ben -- I changed my name: <http://periodic-kingdom.org/People/NameChange.php>