From: Simon Buchan (simon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-28 05:05:46
Goran Mitrovic wrote:
> David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>
>>We really need a section at the top of the page titled "What is Boost?"
>>that covers something like the following:
>>* Boost is a collection of C++ libraries
>> - Free for any use
>> - Extensively peer-reviewed
>> - Extensively Tested
>
>
> Would it be fair to also mention drawbacks of boost? I can currently think of
> two of them: pretty large impact on compiling-time and, in the case of rare bugs
> or misunderstandings how things work, it's sometimes/often/mostly (some poll
> could pick a realistic adjective) hard to peep in sources and see what's wrong -
> there are sometimes too many layers (which is good from some perspectives), too
> much usage of preprocessor (impressive design, but, the code is completely
> unreadable, especially to beginners) and too much compiler workarounds (they are
> good because you can compile, but they uglify the code, without a doubt).
You forgot the 10M error messages and issues with compiler conformance! :D
Actually, I think Boost should be part of any compiler-writers
regression/conformance-testing (with the workarounds removed, of course)
More on topic: yes, to a point. No more than one paragraph at the top
with a link to getting-started. I also think the documentation links
should be much more obvious, if not actually expanded to the library
listing.