From: Eugene Lazutkin \(318900\) (eugene.lazutkin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-24 11:40:37
"Edward Diener" <eddielee_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> I guess I don't understand the issue regarding size per se. Unless one is
> programming embedded systems nowadays it practically doesn't seem to
> Of course I understand designing something well so that extraneous code or
> code duplication doesn't occur, and I enjoy as much as the next programmer
> designing something elegant, creative, and beautiful. But just as in a
> well known area, size matters much less than people think and creativity
> what counts.
Just a simple example from life. One company provides some service on
Internet. It involves downloading ActiveX control (~500k). Of course, some
people defected during installation process. When defection rate was
analyzed it turned out that a lot of people wouldn't wait for download
(automatic installation) to finish. The rule is simple: if takes more than 3
minutes to download something, majority of people will leave no matter what
you do on web site or how you explain waiting time to them. Amazingly in our
age of broadband vast majority of US users are using regular modems. Some of
them can download at 56kbps but majority peaks about 28kbps. The situation
is even worse for international users. Additional problem is presented by
rising wave of wireless users, which speed is limited by 40-60kbps at best.
There is one more consideration: if some library adds, say, 400k of dead
weight to the app, which uses 10 libraries like that, the total excessive
weight is going to be 5M.
If your library is 500k alone it means it will take about 3 minutes to
download it using most popular connection --- 28800. It renders it
unsuitable for client side of distributed applications targeted towards mass
user. It doesn't matter how good is what you do, if user will abandon
download. In the example above 500k will double size of the client (.exe
compression may shave off some fat). Use of Regex++/Greta was evaluated but
ruled out for now. To be honest a lot of really useful libraries didn't pass
this criteria and were replaced by home-made solutions.
I agree with Andrei that user/developer should not be "punished" for
functionality, which is not used. In fact C++ was built upon this kind of
philosophy. Regex++ and Greta are great libraries but they should support
the same philosophical concept as well to be truly universal.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk