4 ms·

That's why there is boost and lots of experimentation by compiler developers commercial and in academia. C/C++/Fortran and other de jeur standard languages do

by woan 16y ago

That's why there is boost and lots of experimentation by compiler developers commercial and in academia. C/C++/Fortran and other de jeur standard languages do seem to have a very long life with multiple implementations on multiple platforms...

16s 16y ago
Much of Boost is the next standard. It's awesome stuff. I love C++.
- confuzatron 16y ago
  I hate 'legacy' C++, but have become a fan of 'boost' C++.
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  If I had my wish, the QT containers would become the standard. I know c++ and complexification go together like bread and jam but STL in general and especially Boost seem to go too far for even for the rest of c++. Of course, I'm sure if I worked with it enough, I'd learn it's strange beauty. It's just I hadn't so far.
danieldk 16y ago
ISO standardization also makes things too static at times. For instance, the hash table omission accident gave us non-standard hash tables for years, until TR1 was finally settled. Boost is nice, but usually only ancient versions are available on clusters (where RHEL 4 or even 3 is still common). The more complete the standard language library, the better.
- slug 16y ago
  You can always compile boost and install it locally, the full 64bit version only takes about 100MB: $ du -hsc boost/1.45.0/* 68M boost/1.45.0/include 37M boost/1.45.0/lib 104M total Add cmake/autoconf and it's fairly trivial to make it work with your software or even ship it with your source code: after all the Boost license is fairly permissive.
  - danieldk 16y ago
    Yes, that is what we do. We include a Boost subset. But that shouldn't be necessary. It's extra maintenance, duplication, and annoying.
- chancho 16y ago
  On what distributions do you find ancient versions of boost but recent versions of GCC? If the standardization process moved faster you'd still have to wait.
confuzatron 16y ago
De jeur? Ah... de jure.
ramchip 16y ago
de jeur => du jour? de jure?

by woan 16y ago

16s 16y ago

Much of Boost is the next standard. It's awesome stuff. I love C++.

confuzatron 16y ago
I hate 'legacy' C++, but have become a fan of 'boost' C++.
joe_the_user 16y ago
If I had my wish, the QT containers would become the standard. I know c++ and complexification go together like bread and jam but STL in general and especially Boost seem to go too far for even for the rest of c++. Of course, I'm sure if I worked with it enough, I'd learn it's strange beauty. It's just I hadn't so far.

danieldk 16y ago

ISO standardization also makes things too static at times. For instance, the hash table omission accident gave us non-standard hash tables for years, until TR1 was finally settled. Boost is nice, but usually only ancient versions are available on clusters (where RHEL 4 or even 3 is still common). The more complete the standard language library, the better.

slug 16y ago
You can always compile boost and install it locally, the full 64bit version only takes about 100MB: $ du -hsc boost/1.45.0/* 68M boost/1.45.0/include 37M boost/1.45.0/lib 104M total Add cmake/autoconf and it's fairly trivial to make it work with your software or even ship it with your source code: after all the Boost license is fairly permissive.
- danieldk 16y ago
  Yes, that is what we do. We include a Boost subset. But that shouldn't be necessary. It's extra maintenance, duplication, and annoying.
chancho 16y ago
On what distributions do you find ancient versions of boost but recent versions of GCC? If the standardization process moved faster you'd still have to wait.

confuzatron 16y ago

De jeur? Ah... de jure.

ramchip 16y ago

de jeur => du jour? de jure?