Re: [boost] This AFIO review (was: Re: [afio] AFIO review postponed till Monday)

Subject: Re: [boost] This AFIO review (was: Re: [afio] AFIO review postponed till Monday)
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-23 11:10:57

On 23 Aug 2015 at 10:36, Glen Fernandes wrote:

> > The *internal* *implementation* of the v1.4 AFIO you are being
> > presented with is currently implemented internally using the v1.3
> > engine. That makes it just as reliable, just as well tested, just as
> > solid a base for a database application as v1.3 AFIO is, except it is
> > now easier to program against. A later *internal* implementation will
> > be completely new, but that isn't important to this review because
> > little external changes. Code written now still works later, just
> > faster.
> 
> I see where I was not on the same page. You meant AFIO's
> implementation is going to change (get faster) later, but AFIO's
> interface is complete now.

Exactly right.

> I think you're better off not mentioning the different versions, and
> possibly even future implementation details; it is only going to
> confuse us. Unless you intend for the latter to impact the review
> (i.e. for anyone who finds AFIO not fast enough now, vote differently
> based on the promise of a faster engine later) which you've already
> stated in your e-mail above that you do not wish to do.

I would have just loved to do as you say, but I was trapped. I knew 
that those people who have openly declared war on everything I do 
would do their absolute best to FUD this review as a way of point 
scoring and settling grudges. They have been quite literally waiting 
for this moment with anticipation of "taking me down a peg", and you 
can see that happening right now.

So I decided that absolute transparency, even if that hurt my 
chances, was the best policy. I think I have better chances this 
route than the alternative which would allow the FUD to succeed more 
easily because it could then be implied that I was hiding something 
or lying to people.

> > Again, instead of jumping to conclusions based on ranting by a person
> > with a well known personal vendetta against me, I'd suggest go read
> > the documentation.
> 
> Will do. I was at Table 1.4 which prompted my recent questions about
> performance.

I couldn't find a Table 1.4.

Did you mean Table 1.5, the one comparing NoSQL databases with the 
naïve iostreams and AFIO key-value store and where AFIO comes off 
looking particularly badly?

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/