* Chidambaram Annamalai <quantumelixir_AT_gmail.com> [2010-08-11 03:26:22 +0530]:
> I didn't argue BGL was simple. But I'd certainly consider it elegant. Of
no it's not elegant
graph algorithms are too versatile to do elegantly what boost tries to do
(eg boost tries to operate on a generic graph type which cannot work
as different graph representations often require different algorithms
also space-time and other important tradoffs cannot be expressed this way)
in bgl a shortest path algorithm has 12 arguments some of them are type
parameters some of them are objects with various methods defined on them
generic programming is mixed with oo inheritence all over the place
(good luck figuring out the error message you get when you miss something)
the entire library is implemented in header files
(so compile time is guaranteed to be huge)
using boost involves a fair amount of c++ trickery and boilerplate
looking at boost examples i can not believe someone found this elegant
elegant code reads like pseudo code
boost is nothing like the code you find in algorithm books
(i hoped that you were just trolling)
Received on Wed Aug 11 2010 - 08:54:15 CEST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Aug 11 2010 - 09:00:03 CEST