On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski@gmail.com> wrote:
The main issue is that most software developers don't need such a library; only game developers do,
What about academics?
but you can't get them to agree on the details. I have worked in the game industry long enough to see that not only each team has their own "math" library that's slightly different than everyone else's, but also many teams periodically end up rewriting it.
While I agree with the experience, I disagree that it supports the statement. Many if not most game developers also write their own shared pointers, their own RTTI, their own threads, own filesystem wrappers, own string classes and even own containers... from the two commercial game engines I had a pleasure to see, those weren't better and usually even worse than those from STL/boost. It's more about the mentality of game programmers who usually have a very high self-esteem, and tend to think "I'll do it better". But that doesn't mean that there are no reasonable game programmers out there, which are already using boost versions of the forementioned libraries, and wish that boost included a 3d geometry oriented library also... -- regards, Kornel Kisielewicz