4 ms·
I don't know what you're disagreeing with, but I suppose you're welcome to open up a PR to change the standard library with your specific use case so you can me
by jackblemming 4y ago
I don't know what you're disagreeing with, but I suppose you're welcome to open up a PR to change the standard library with your specific use case so you can meet a contract date. I imagine you'll be quite handedly laughed at.
- lr4444lr 4y agoStandard libraries was one example you cited for a broad claim about "good code". I'm not arguing about standard libraries.
- aprdm 4y agoMany companies I worked at had forks of stanrdadd libraries internally
- azemetre 4y agoI've seen this often as well, typically some library will get flag by programs like snyk giving you a "high" score. The way snyk scores packages is completely asinine. It favors libraries that are constantly being updated compared to say some library that is feature complete and in maintenance mode. One way around this is to literally pull all the source code and paste it into your repo.
- Glavnokoman 4y agoSame here. And every time that was a mistake and the fork sucks.
- Const-me 4y agoI have replaced pieces of C++ standard library quite a few times. std::list calls malloc/free for every node instead of a bunch of them, expensive. Also they are doubly linked, for some applications a single-linked lists fit better. std::vector<bool> lacks data() method, makes serializing/deserializing them prohibitively expensive. Even something as simple as std::min / std::max for float and double types aren't using the correct implementation on AMD64, which is a single instruction like _mm_min_ss / _mm_max_sd.