Re: [boost] Formal Review of Proposed Boost.Process library

Hi Max - Sounds like you have a competing library? Would you consider merging?

The Boost.Process must be implemented as a DSEL (probably through the Boost.Proto expression templates framework) with a nice (commonly known) syntax like: ... auto pipe = ls [--arg("reverse") % -arg('l') % libs] | grep ["^d"];

I think that's neat but it should be implemented as another layer on top of a functional/OO layer. Cheers, Gordon