3 ms·
I don't consider C++'s Boost something to be proud about. Last time I've checked, Google forbade a significant part of it to their developers, and in my opinion
by acqq 11y ago
I don't consider C++'s Boost something to be proud about. Last time I've checked, Google forbade a significant part of it to their developers, and in my opinion rightly so. But who likes everything there should just as well understand this Node affair.
- vinkelhake 11y agoBoost has been incredibly successful as a breeding ground for new C++ libraries. Much of the functionality that was added to the standard library in C++11 came from Boost. This continues to this day. It's a collection of libraries, no one is using all of it.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 11y agoGoogle's c++ guidelines are idiosyncratic at best.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoGoogle makes a lot of controversial decisions from engineering standpoint, not least of which is doing half of their stuff in Java. (It always bewildered me - why hire the best of the best, and then make them work with lowest-common-denominator tools?)
- acqq 11y agoFrom my point of view, if we remain by why not allowing everything Boost, it isn't controversial at all, for the same reason that Linus (an I too) believe that it is a good that Linux kernel is pure C and not C++. And the same reason why some people now see that the presented Node popular practices aren't something that the battle-tested players consider reasonable to do.