Is Boost guilty of being un-Boost-like?

Question

I was just reading the intro to the Boost::Spirit LL Parser framework. The preface suggests that the author and creator likes to use such parsing technology to read in program options. Doesn't Boost have its own library for program options?

I am wondering, does the Boost committee review all the library notes for common themes and style? It seems the doc for each library have their own flavor to them.

Small gripe for an otherwise amazing piece of software, I just found it curious.

Answer 1

Simply, Spirit existed before the Boost.Program-Options library. Now, I always use Boost.Program-Options instead of hand-rolling my own using Spirit.