Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Tom Brinkman (reportbase2007_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-23 18:04:15

>> Shucks, a hardcore C++ library doesn't cater too well for C programmers!

Aggreed.  Its almost as though some C++ programmers dont even know that "C"
exists.  Its a pity.

There are many things that the typical C++ programmer could learn from the
typical C programmer.  Not sure it works in reverse though.

 3) Dependencies.
>>
>>
> Agreed, its a mess
>
>> 4) Research Projects
>>
>>
> Yup, agreed.
>
>> 5) Macros
>>
>>
>

> >> Well, that's what you get from trying to buil header only solutions with
> templates when some old-fashioned inheritance would have done. I agree.
> stlsoft stuff is the same.
>
> >> Personally I much prefer Poco and from what you've said I think you
> would too - but I find myself wanting ASIO and Botan uses Boost and so does
> qpid - and to be honest there are useful things like tuple and it can be
> hard to entirely avoid it.
>
>   I know, boost has some real gems.  Asio is wonderful.
>

>  >> int value = atoi("3.00");
>>
>>
> >> Except that this is actually a piss-poor example isn't it? - because an
> input that isn't well formed is not detected by atoi, which is why you have
> to use strtol and check what the endptr is doing - but no-one every does
> that right, every time.  Which is why exceptions are there.

Agreed.

> >> I think maybe Boost should look to partition itself into 'general
> purpose' libraries and a number of application-oriented libraries, and then
> look at the stability/maturity within those.  But its already fragmented, so
> there is a possibility to make life even worse here.
>

Agreed.

>
> >> In many respects I think Boost displays some of the worst aspects of
> open source development, with a tendency to include things 'because I can
> and its really clever' rather than 'because you need it to do your mundane
> little project'. At the end of the day its a volunteer model and they don't
> actually work as well as a model with leadership, vision - and budget. Which
> is arguably why qt is in the ascendent now. Perhaps we should all just put
> principle aside and learn to moc.
>
> I do agree with a lot of what you say - but not pleasing C programmers!
>

Agreed.

>
> James
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>