Christian Schladetsch schrieb am Dienstag 09 Juni 2009 um 11:50:
Hi Daniel,
OK. This thread suggests that a 'system that supports DirectX
development' would be rejected.
It could be argued otherwise. This thread already has over 75 responses. If the case was automatically unianimous, it would be more like 5 responses.
The length of this thread is more likely caused by your offending wording style, like rendering people unworthy responding to your posts because they don't know the characteristics of JVM and CLR well enough. However, here are my 2 cents... My impression is that you want to get more people to use boost in a directx context. This is a win-win situation, since this brings cleaner code into games and more code testing users to boost. But an important point about boost is: Write once, compile (and thus run) everywhere. This is a conflict you cannot resolve. Your lib would be AFAIK the first one that doesn't fit into this requirement. Given the fact you are a directx guy and not a OpenGL one makes it unpractical for you to do a good job on writing the same for OpenGL or even do an abstraction. So why not just start a project at sourceforge/code.google and post release notifications to the boost-users list? Aside from publicity, being part of the daily testing cycle is the most important benefit of getting your code into boost. If more projects like yours are around it maybe the time to think about domain/platform specific boost- extensions, which are hosted at boost.org and included in the automatic testing system. Live long and prosper, --Maik