[bitc-dev] Boost library: good or bad

[Philipp Klaus Krause]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jonathan S. Shapiro schrieb:
> We now have the BitC compiler cleaned up to the point where we can
> switch over to the boost library using a single script. The question is:
> should we do this?
> 
> The original reason for switching was the theory that:
> 
>   (a) boost is widely used and widely available
>   (b) certain portions of boost are being added to the standard C++
>       library (all the parts that we use are in this category)
>   (c) Any library that somebody else can maintain is good, provided
>       it is available.
> 
> In my opinion, (b) is still a compelling reason to use the boost library
> in preference to libsherpa where the two have comparable functionality.

This switch sounds like an a step towards making bitc more usable as a
standalone compiler (instead of just for bitc development). I welcome it.

Philipp

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiTbA0ACgkQbtUV+xsoLpr8vgCfa3/qGgIcErp7ZSNRoJayGPh1
XdAAoIccQhsEL/jTy5rzkOTo46eGln+X
=wdwW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----