oversearch commented on issue #367: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/issues/367#issuecomment-1843826324
I personally don't mind a boost dependency on the project. It has a lot of great stuff that you wouldn't want to re-implement yourself, and a large number of C++ projects are already using it anyway. That header list you posted has some nontrivial stuff that won't be in the STL anytime soon or ever. That said, I will note that ASIO is updated a bit more frequently, and with more serious changes than most Boost libraries. This makes the independent ASIO library more attractive. At my company, we use Pulsar from two separate C++ code bases, one of which is unfortunately tied down to an old boost version (we're trying to fix that, but it's a huge code base). In order to get Pulsar to build under this and get consistent behavior/performance, I started maintaining a custom fork of Pulsar with `boost::asio` renamed to just `asio::`, and we utilize the independent ASIO library in both. It works very well and the changes were pretty simple (you need to fix the "error code" type as well) - a days worth of work. One thing you could consider doing is just using a preprocessor definition to allow the ASIO namespace to be customized, so users could choose which library they wanted (heavy boost users on a greenfield version will no doubt find that convenient). Just my two cents as a heavy commercial Pulsar user. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
