Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers

Subject: Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers
From: Artyom (artyomtnk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-20 12:38:52

> 
> What I find strange is that Boost librariy developers, in
> general, seems to
> agree that template bloat is of no or little concern,
> #include dependencies
> is of no or little concern, and compilation time for
> end-user is of
> absolutely no concern. 

You just said what I was thinking about. There is some kind
of Urban Myths in Boost community

- Headers always better then sources.
- Inline functions is best way to improve performance.
- Concepts are **always** better then inheritance (even if they
  triple the size of the code).

Sad.

> 
> Looking forward to a wrapped up Boost btw, if Booster ever
> comes to life!
> 

Just a small point:

I really hope that someday there would be boost-stable, boost-abi or just
boost would become stable. I think it would be great if that stability
would be official and supported part of original boost.

I don't think that Booster is the way to go because I created it for
my partial needs rather needs of Boost community.

For example:

- Booster.Thread is just wrapper of pthreads/pthreads-win32 with boost
  like API.
- Booster.Regex is just a wrapper of PCRE.

I had no time to start adopting Boost code for ABI stability I have
interests of my project. That are first at this point.

ABI stable boost should be part of Boost and not external boost-like
library.

In any case you are wellcome to try it and give any inputs:

As I told it has, regex, threads, aio, function, smart-pointers and more.

Booster is generally description of the reasons I need to create one.

Artyom