[boost] Re: Re: MPL containers and algorithms

From: Andrei Alexandrescu (andrewalex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-01 10:52:48

"Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:005c01c23967$4aaf1c80$0f00a8c0_at_fernandoc...
> I myself, *a priori*, find hard to believe that such fundamental
> abstractions are useless in a different computational model. Their
different
> mutating/generative properties might be irrelevant, but not their
different
> access capabilities .
>
> I won't come up with a sound example in the short/mid term mainly because
I
> might not find the need for it myself, but I think it will come eventually
> once MPL becomes widely used.

An important detail that's being forgotten is the cost of a design. MPL's
design introduces complications that make it hard to learn, hard to use, and
the client code hard to understand. These are important costs.

If these costs are to be paid upfront, it would be nice if the benefit would
be more than "maybe someday..."

MPL has been out for a while and there still aren't examples that justify
the presence of multiple containers, even from its own authors. I understand
that MPL uses STL's design, and many say this is a hallmark, but that's not
an argument by itself. As said in another post, they use very different
means and have very different ends. It's art for the sake of the art if it's
not useful.

Andrei