Goran Mitrovic wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
FWIW, I'd vote my support for xpressive. I'd vote that it be added to the boost libraries. The question some people ask is why have an alternative library that overlaps over existing libraries in boost (i.e. Boost.Regex and Spirit). I'd say that we should always welcome alternative libraries. I do not
Not really always. Don't you think that Boost can be (or even already is) overcrowded? I cannot really define this with words; it's a feeling that I get from its everyday use. And there is a lot of conformation of my feeling I see in my smalltalk with friends/coworkers.
Are you saying that we should not accept a library to avoid over-crowding boost? Hmmm, doesn't sound right to me.
P.S. I know this is not a very valuable comment, but, you guys seem to often think too much as a "boost let's-prove-c++-is-almighty developers", not "boost users". :|
I don't know how this comment is related in any way to the topic. I can't seem to see the connection. Anyway..., I don't think I ever gave the impression that I, as a boost developer, am trying to prove that "c++-is-almighty". I'm very well aware of C++'s weeknesses. This is in fact one of reasons why we're here in the first place: to develop libraries to make C++ better. A lot of the libraries here (e.g. lambda, variant, tuples) are already available in other languages (e.g. Haskell, ML, Lisp). C++ is not almighty superior. In fact, in many cases, we're catching up. So, I'm going to dismiss that and strike it off to see if your comment will make sense without the baseless phrase. Let's see... "you guys seem to often think too much as a 'boost developers', not 'boost users'". Hmmmm... I give up. I'll never understand why you think so unless you list the /whys/. Is your impression in any way connected to your feeling that Boost is getting over crowded and hence more unfriendly to the Boost user? Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net