James Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Abrahams wrote: > >>... We don't want to rebuild quickbook >>each time you need a new collector behavior, so I think binding to an >>interpreted language (Python, please) is almost mandatory. You could >>do it with plug-in dynamic libraries, I suppose, but this is a job I >>just see no good reason to do in C++. >> >> > I was under the impression that there was a strong bias towards avoiding > dependencies on other languages within the Boost "tools", although I > don't exactly recall where that impression came from.
Probably from the process that led to the adoption of bjam instead of a Python-based system. That consensus has since been revised. We have all kinds of systems that are dependent on external tools. Just look at the Boostbook toolchain. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
