Re: [boost] Boost on Android

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost on Android
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-19 11:19:57

On 19 Mar 2015 at 15:48, Dmitry Moskalchuk wrote:

> > Your NDK preceded Google's C++ support?
> 
> Yes. Google released NDK in 2009, and there was no support for C++ at
> all. There was tons of requests to add C++ support from developers in
> android-ndk group for a months, without any reaction from Google. Then
> I've started working on adding C++ support into NDK and to the end of
> 2009 I've published first version of CrystaX NDK. Anyway, even after
> that, being constantly pressured by developers community, Google have
> added C++ support only to NDK r5 (December 2010), and it was exactly my
> patches applied to the upstream (with minimal non-significant changes).
> Counting from beginning, it took almost two years before Google did
> that; and even when it was done, it was far from being _really_ _full_
> C++ support. This is still true - Google's NDK still don't support C++
> fully; in contrast with Google, we're paying special attention to do it
> as good as we can.

I take my hat off to you sir. Thank you for such a huge contribution 
to C++.

And shame on Google for that matter. They should just cut you an 
annual cheque instead of poorly cloning your work.

> > But 
> > what I would suggest is that you campaign for a "name and shame" of 
> > the top unit test failing libraries on master branch to be 
> > automatically posted once per month to boost-dev, where the ranking 
> > is scored by libraries consistently failing month after month. That 
> > would include all regression test failures, not just CrystaX.
> 
> No objections on that; I just wondering how to do that technically? Do
> you mean some existing web page? Or should we create new one? Or it
> should be just once-per-month e-mail to this list?

I think the technical difficulty of an email once per month is 
nothing like the cultural difficulty here. We don't name and shame at 
Boost historically. I personally think we should, but it isn't my 
call to make.

The general process of getting a decision is to generate consensus 
here on boost-dev somehow, and perhaps institute a voluntary opt in 
prototype with a few volunteer maintainers (I'll volunteer AFIO right 
now, and I can't see Vicente having a problem with Thread. Chris just 
patched ASIO to fix your test failures after I asked him, so I'd 
assume he'd be in too). After it's proven to work for some months and 
the community feels comfortable (or not) with it, you then formally 
ask the Boost Steering Committee for a resolution in favour of 
instituting it across the board.

That's my best suggestion anyway. Obviously these are matters far 
wider than Android support, so it's a lot more thorny. For example, 
if a library repeatedly gets stuck at the top of that name and shame 
leaderboard, it could generate negative vibes around the library or 
its maintainers which has unhelpful effects on the community. We 
already have enough of that with Test.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/