Subject: Re: [boost] boost::directx?
From: Daniel James (daniel_james_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-09 10:18:10
2009/6/9 Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]>:
> Daniel James skrev:
>>
>> OK. This thread suggests that a 'system that supports DirectX
>> development' would be rejected.
>
> Why?
Because most people seem to be against it? I deliberately said that
this thread suggests that it would be rejected - not that it is
'against the rules' or that I would vote against it. I'm more
interested in people's interpretation of how boost works.
It also doesn't help that the proposer doesn't value diplomacy.
> How many of those with negative comments are actually using direct x?
The negative comments are almost uniformly about the suitability of a
library that's tied to a third party non-portable library. I don't
recall anyone criticizing the quality of direct x.
> I personally think it would be a ice addition to boost, if it adds true
> value.
The best way to show that would be to post an encouraging response to
the original post.
Daniel