On Mar 23, 2010, at 11:31 PM, Tom Brinkman wrote:
I'm tired of this thread too. But dear Johathan, you have completely missed my point. All I'm saying is that in the real world, most projects are mixed C/C++ and that the needs of both communities need to be addressed if boost is going to remain relevent.
What changes would we need to make to Boost in order to stay relevant (to that C/C++ mixed reality)? Would it require us to provide C wrappers for all our libraries? /David
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jonathan Franklin <franklin.jonathan@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Tom Brinkman <reportbase2007@gmail.com> wrote:
... Still just plain "C" though. I know this because I've worked with the IPP guys.
vsiplplusplus appears to be just like every other C++ graphics library, in that it just puts a pretty C++ face onto an otherwise ugly C graphics library.
I have no comment about any of the specific libraries in question. However, your argument is basically akin to asserting that the linux kernel is just a pretty C face onto an otherwise ugly assembler library, because we all know that the core parts are written in hand-optimised assembler, because compiled C just doesn't cut it. ;-)
It is also troll bait, that belongs in /dev/null.
The C++ wrappers to graphics libraries exist because most OS primitives and device drivers are in C, and the primitive libraries happen to be unusable for anything large scale. But that's an opinion.
Let's get back to improving boost! :-)
Jon _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost