> > Speaking about boost::spirit, don't you think it *does* heavily depends > > on templates ? ;-) > > boost::spirit is the reason I added boost deps to liban, but to be > > honest, I've no intention to use boost::spirit in the future, it's just > > too undebuggable only for syntaxic sugars. You have not coded a full > > featured bytecode-based calculator with boost::spirit, haev you? > > No, spirit isn't for bytecode, its for text, like parsing the config > files such as data/buildings.txt, which is what I thought it would be > usefull for.
Well, I know what spirit is for and I consider that using it produces too undebuggable code (and if I want to put bytecode in my calculators that's my *right*) ;-)) (but ok, the bytecode thing was for the beauty of the sentence and contained no apparent information other that the hint I love bytecode). The text stream parser is very happy as it is and does not wish to mary spirit, it is very materialist, poor soul. > > So, using boost, ok, abusing of boost, lost of time. > > Boost isn't entirely template based, although a great deal of it is. I > would say that increased compile time isn't neccessarilly a problem, > Boost developers have been carefull to do their code to reduce code > bloat and compile times, however using boost will certainly show an > increase in compile times, the development times and debugging times > will drop as well. You know, some people code faster that their g++ compiles... ;-) But I totally agree with a reasonable usage of boost. Just keep in mind boost is not always the holy grail to any of your problem. Have a nice evening, Steph -- http://nct.ysagoon.com _______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
