>From: "E. Gladyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >[snip] >> template < typename IT, typename PhysicalGuiLayer > >> class ListControl >[snip] > >I'm coming in a bit late into this discussion, but I too am interested in >the outcome of this project. > >I strongly dislike the PhysicalGuiLayer template parameter, for several >reasons...
Always hard to tell without seeing a firm proposal, but for me a PhysicalGuiLayer template parameter would probably evoke an "over my dead body" response. I think the reasons Doug gives in his message are just the tip of the iceberg, but they are plenty good enough to sink the ship, IMO.
The whole point of a "portable GUI library" is the word "portable", and I meant semantically portable, not just syntactically portable. Thus the sort of examples Brock has been posting are what I would hope to see - no mention of platforms. OTOH, Eugene has posted a series of examples which include "win32" in various names, and I find those pretty repulsive. I don't have and problem with Win32 as a platform and use it as my preferred development environment. But my code must be portable to all modern systems, and a few legacy systems too.
--Beman
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
