3 ms·

Can't speak to Abseil but I won't let boost within 10,000 feet of any codebase I control. I value my compile times more than anything it provides.

ubadair 9y ago
Boost contains over 120 libraries and counting, with over 70 authors and maintainers. There are many parts of Boost that I will never use (e.g. most of the pre c++11 libs), but the pros of having it available when you need it far outweigh the cons. If a particular library is costing you more in compile time than it's worth in convenience, just rm -rf it from your Boost install -- better yet, write a script to prepend `static_assert(false, "this header is banned by decree of vvanders");` to the top of the banned headers. There's plenty in Boost to love -- don't let a few rotten apples spoil the bunch. Full disclosure: I'm a Boost developer
- vvanders 9y ago
  So I should hack apart my install just to get to some basic level of compiler performance? Last time I looked at boost pulling in any header would pull in all of them, that's why it takes so long to compile. In this day with any modern C++0x11 compiler I don't really see the need for boost.
  - jhasse 9y ago
    Just include a header and see how it affects your compile time. I can't confirm what you're saying for example.
  - int_19h 9y ago
    > Last time I looked at boost pulling in any header would pull in all of them This has literally never been true.
Layuso 9y ago
I value my developing times more than anything. Boost is one library which is developed and tested on almost every c++ target platform, providing us with stable, tested, and performing common utilities to speed up your developments and run anywhere. Reasons not to use boost: - My code is one monolithic spaghetti and I do not use unit tests. - I do not want to learn Boost. - I don't trust template hippies. Not using Boost is an irrational decision and you know it.

ubadair 9y ago

Boost contains over 120 libraries and counting, with over 70 authors and maintainers. There are many parts of Boost that I will never use (e.g. most of the pre c++11 libs), but the pros of having it available when you need it far outweigh the cons. If a particular library is costing you more in compile time than it's worth in convenience, just rm -rf it from your Boost install -- better yet, write a script to prepend `static_assert(false, "this header is banned by decree of vvanders");` to the top of the banned headers. There's plenty in Boost to love -- don't let a few rotten apples spoil the bunch. Full disclosure: I'm a Boost developer

vvanders 9y ago
So I should hack apart my install just to get to some basic level of compiler performance? Last time I looked at boost pulling in any header would pull in all of them, that's why it takes so long to compile. In this day with any modern C++0x11 compiler I don't really see the need for boost.
- jhasse 9y ago
  Just include a header and see how it affects your compile time. I can't confirm what you're saying for example.
- int_19h 9y ago
  > Last time I looked at boost pulling in any header would pull in all of them This has literally never been true.

Layuso 9y ago

I value my developing times more than anything. Boost is one library which is developed and tested on almost every c++ target platform, providing us with stable, tested, and performing common utilities to speed up your developments and run anywhere. Reasons not to use boost: - My code is one monolithic spaghetti and I do not use unit tests. - I do not want to learn Boost. - I don't trust template hippies. Not using Boost is an irrational decision and you know it.