3 ms·
> I'd point to projects like Boost for C++… as examples of third-party libraries which offer features comparable in quality, stability, etc. On Windows I tend
by Const-me 8y ago
> I'd point to projects like Boost for C++… as examples of third-party libraries which offer features comparable in quality, stability, etc.
On Windows I tend to avoid Boost when I can. At least when I worked on Boost-based C++ projects a few years ago, boost’s quality varied a lot between different parts of the library. Also it’s huge, affects complexity of build process, may affect compilation times, by default it links to some very large dynamic libraries i.e. complicates and inflates installer. Also they have a lot of code for compatibility with older versions of the language, they support C++0x. I usually have much newer versions, always C++14 usually 17. In short, with boost I feel like I’m paying for a lot of things I don’t need.
> Like programming language features? ;)
Some languages have core design teams, who aren’t a collective body, have clear shared vision, and are therefore able to do better design. When I’m looking at what’s happening with Rust, or Golang, or C#, I see rate of improvements faster than that of C++ or Python or JavaScript.