Thanks for doost.program_options

[Jason House]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Totally not Doost's fault that Boost libraries are poorly documented, of 
> course.  Just annoying.  I don't really understand why everyone is so 
> wild about Boost.  I've yet to meet a Boost library that didn't waste 
> hours of my time just in trying to accomplish the most basic thing.

I've used boost's shared_ptr library without hassle.  In D, that library 
is unneeded because GC is built in.

I agree that using a new boost library does take a considerable amount 
of time.  In many cases, I end up saving time in the long run by not 
implementing (and debugging...) similar functionality.  I've liked the 
boost libraries because I know that after I finish learning how to use 
them, they'll work cross platform and have plenty of features I'll want 
once I realize I need them.  While the docs, ability to follow code, and 
initial debug when using the libraries isn't very appealing a guarantee 
of underlying code quality is.