This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Boost (C++ libraries) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Explanation of licencing terms, ( see MIT Licence ) ? References to alternatives like POCO ( http://pocoproject.org ), Platinum ( http://pt-framework.sourceforge.net ) and Dlib ( http://dclib.sourceforge.net ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Savuporo ( talk • contribs) 12:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Why not reword "modern c++" to include either the 1998 specification with templates or "c++ with STL" style wording. There is also a compiler support/regression page available such as [1]. Laundrypowder 04:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
What about renaming the article to "Boost library" (or similar) instead? I find "Boost (programming)" a bit inelegant? -- Fredrik Orderud 20:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
if it stands for something...
See: http://www.boost.org/more/faq.htm Where does the name "Boost" come from? Boost began with Robert Klarer and I fantasizing about a new library effort over dinner at a C++ committee meeting in Sofia Antipolis, France, in 1998. Robert mentioned that Herb Sutter was working on a spoof proposal for a new language named Booze, which was supposed to be better than Java. Somehow that kicked off the idea of "Boost" as a name. We'd probably had a couple of glasses of good French wine at that point. It was just a working name, but no one ever came up with a replacement. Otodoran 23:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I looked through the Libraries section, and admit that I can't think of a cleaner or more concise way to describe the information therein. I feel that what is presented is a key part of the article, and should be present. The difficulty is that by its very nature, is tiered, embedded, and somewhat complex. I think that any other method of presenting the information would just result in the section being longer, more complex, and more difficult to parse. I vote for removing the tag: please comment with your feelings. Dxco 01:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't follow what is wrong with examples. Are there actual guidelines on this? A found the example of Boost.Threads to be more clear than what I saw on other sites. I cut and pasted into my own code and it worked -- a thing of beauty in terms of examples since they showed only what is essential boost. I checked back today and found the examples are gone and the page nothing more than a basic description of what boost is (i.e., less informational value than other sites). I have been intending to post example code in other articles as I see this is already common. Are examples destined to be removed? Arbalest Mike ( talk) 03:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent addition of links. Links to articles that has nothing to do with the Boost C++ Libraries, such as the link to spirit for the Boost.Spirit library, or links to disambiguation pages only serve to confuse the reader. Please ensure that the links are relevant and disambiguate where appropriate. decltype ( talk) 20:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I heard somewhere boost was going to get added to the ANSI spec for C++.
Is this bologna?
-- 214.4.3.75 ( talk) 02:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Ten Boost libraries are already included in the C++ Standards Committee's Library Technical Report (TR1) and will be in the new C++0x Standard now being finalized. C++0x will also include several more Boost libraries in addition to those from TR1. More Boost libraries are proposed for TR2.
You may find more info in C++ Technical Report 1 and C++0x. Tigrisek ( talk) 21:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 20:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Boost C++ Libraries →
C++ libraries
Boost C++ libraries –
Not a protocol, but a set of libraries, as it says in the article text (with lowercase "l", too). Per WP:CAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony (talk) 07:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
In that case, we better start over with our reactions:
decltype
(
talk)
16:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Since the RM failed, I took the liberty of moving to one of the plausible suggested titles. Anyone prefer a different one instead? Go for it. Dicklyon ( talk) 23:59, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
JFTR, Boost Software License and its talk page now end up here after an AFD discussion. – Be..anyone ( talk) 18:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
It should be noted that C++17 may have a filesystem library based on boost::filesystem. At least, the proposal exists, I'm not sure where it stands in the standard itself. 40.142.182.216 ( talk) 05:55, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
C++17 has adopted (adapted?) much of the Boost filesystem library. Boost has a Python (language) library which creates wrappers for C++ code so that it can be used in Python. IOW, Boost is not 'just' for C++. (the copyright on that suggests that this has been available since 2002) IMHO both of these facts are significant and should be mentioned in the article. 40.142.185.108 ( talk) 20:07, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Boost (C++ libraries) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Explanation of licencing terms, ( see MIT Licence ) ? References to alternatives like POCO ( http://pocoproject.org ), Platinum ( http://pt-framework.sourceforge.net ) and Dlib ( http://dclib.sourceforge.net ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Savuporo ( talk • contribs) 12:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Why not reword "modern c++" to include either the 1998 specification with templates or "c++ with STL" style wording. There is also a compiler support/regression page available such as [1]. Laundrypowder 04:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
What about renaming the article to "Boost library" (or similar) instead? I find "Boost (programming)" a bit inelegant? -- Fredrik Orderud 20:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
if it stands for something...
See: http://www.boost.org/more/faq.htm Where does the name "Boost" come from? Boost began with Robert Klarer and I fantasizing about a new library effort over dinner at a C++ committee meeting in Sofia Antipolis, France, in 1998. Robert mentioned that Herb Sutter was working on a spoof proposal for a new language named Booze, which was supposed to be better than Java. Somehow that kicked off the idea of "Boost" as a name. We'd probably had a couple of glasses of good French wine at that point. It was just a working name, but no one ever came up with a replacement. Otodoran 23:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I looked through the Libraries section, and admit that I can't think of a cleaner or more concise way to describe the information therein. I feel that what is presented is a key part of the article, and should be present. The difficulty is that by its very nature, is tiered, embedded, and somewhat complex. I think that any other method of presenting the information would just result in the section being longer, more complex, and more difficult to parse. I vote for removing the tag: please comment with your feelings. Dxco 01:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't follow what is wrong with examples. Are there actual guidelines on this? A found the example of Boost.Threads to be more clear than what I saw on other sites. I cut and pasted into my own code and it worked -- a thing of beauty in terms of examples since they showed only what is essential boost. I checked back today and found the examples are gone and the page nothing more than a basic description of what boost is (i.e., less informational value than other sites). I have been intending to post example code in other articles as I see this is already common. Are examples destined to be removed? Arbalest Mike ( talk) 03:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent addition of links. Links to articles that has nothing to do with the Boost C++ Libraries, such as the link to spirit for the Boost.Spirit library, or links to disambiguation pages only serve to confuse the reader. Please ensure that the links are relevant and disambiguate where appropriate. decltype ( talk) 20:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I heard somewhere boost was going to get added to the ANSI spec for C++.
Is this bologna?
-- 214.4.3.75 ( talk) 02:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Ten Boost libraries are already included in the C++ Standards Committee's Library Technical Report (TR1) and will be in the new C++0x Standard now being finalized. C++0x will also include several more Boost libraries in addition to those from TR1. More Boost libraries are proposed for TR2.
You may find more info in C++ Technical Report 1 and C++0x. Tigrisek ( talk) 21:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 20:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Boost C++ Libraries →
C++ libraries
Boost C++ libraries –
Not a protocol, but a set of libraries, as it says in the article text (with lowercase "l", too). Per WP:CAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony (talk) 07:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
In that case, we better start over with our reactions:
decltype
(
talk)
16:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Since the RM failed, I took the liberty of moving to one of the plausible suggested titles. Anyone prefer a different one instead? Go for it. Dicklyon ( talk) 23:59, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
JFTR, Boost Software License and its talk page now end up here after an AFD discussion. – Be..anyone ( talk) 18:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
It should be noted that C++17 may have a filesystem library based on boost::filesystem. At least, the proposal exists, I'm not sure where it stands in the standard itself. 40.142.182.216 ( talk) 05:55, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
C++17 has adopted (adapted?) much of the Boost filesystem library. Boost has a Python (language) library which creates wrappers for C++ code so that it can be used in Python. IOW, Boost is not 'just' for C++. (the copyright on that suggests that this has been available since 2002) IMHO both of these facts are significant and should be mentioned in the article. 40.142.185.108 ( talk) 20:07, 27 July 2019 (UTC)