AMDG Christian Schladetsch wrote:
Hello Artyom,
It is not about OpenGL, DirectX war, it is about Boost policy
I fully grok boost's policies and ideas. If i wanted to be pendantic, I could name many cases where boosts' own primary policies have been bent, or broken.
Boost is not set in stone. It came from the idea of helping people write good C++.
That is the motivation behind my idea of having a boost::directx namespace.
The hard reality is that a lot of people use C++ and DirectX. A lot of people use C++ *because* they use DirectX. Another group use DirectX because they use C++.
Beyond all the formalities, I have to reduce myself to hand-waving. If you took a survey, in 2009 you will find that most people use C++ under Visual Studio. Fewer use linux-derivatives, and fewer again others use some custom vendors, but in reality, boost is addressing a Windows-oriented, performance-based audience.
That is the reality.
As far as I am concerned, any library that doesn't not work on Linux/Windows/Mac is a non-starter for Boost. If anything I believe that the official rule should be bent towards being more strict than stated.
That audience not only includes but primarily consists of game developers. And they all use DirectX.
So.
Do you want cast down righteous fire from the ivory tower, or do you want to help the coders make performant applications?
Irrelevant. The fact that a library would be useful to many people does not imply that it belongs in Boost. In Christ, Steven Watanabe