Subject: Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-19 15:44:25
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Gennadiy Rozental <rogeeff_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Artyom <artyomtnk <at> yahoo.com> writes:
>> > ...most of its functionality can be found in
>> > other libraries (like ACE
>> > instead of ASIO...)...
>> 1. Boost has better design (I love ASIO API, but I hate compilation
>> Â Â times and bloat)
> ABI issues aside and not to step on anyone foots, but I personally would never
> use ASIO in my production code regardless how cool API is. There is no reason
> for the networking library to be implemented in headers (I myself developed 3
> different async IO libraries for different companies, so I do have experience in
> this domain). I pretty sure you can have the same API with 99% of implementation
> hidden offline.
To be fair, I take the different view.
There is absolutely no reason to make a network library *not*
header-only. Putting everything in headers lets me, the library writer
to never ever have to worry about preserving ABI because, well,
there's no ABI to preserve across releases.
To each his own I guess. ;)
-- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk