>  For the same reasons I am also not worried if it cannot be
>  demonstrated, at this moment, that FC++ is the best way to solve any
>  particular C++ problem. I am confident that it will be useful in many
>  ways, but even if it should ultimately turn out that FC++ is never the
>  best tool, I think accepting FC++ into boost -- with the exploration
>  of new programming techniques and the interaction between programmers
>  with different backgrounds which it will bring about -- would still be
>  worthwhile.

Here we probably disagree. I see boost as a collection of libraries that
intent to be used in practice. Ultimately some of them may join C++
standard. Introduction of solution for no problems does not seems to fit
this. Note: I do not say that there is no problem domain, I just say that
it's imperative to figure it out first, instead of telling C++ community:
"Ok. Here is the library. If you find any use for it let us know"

Regards,

Gennadiy.



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost