Sadly enough my company has used (past tense) STL (No, I don't do C++, I don't touch it), and I was forced, times and times again to debug deep into the damn thing. (Helping other coworkers locate crashes within the library).
It's over-designed, bloated, fairly slow, unreadable, impossible to debug... I do OS abstraction layers for a living (among others) so I know how an efficient underlaying should look like. STL is *far* from that. Can we return to content free mode? :-) Gilboa On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 07:59, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 12:39:19AM +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote: > > > STL is one of the worst pieces of code I ever saw in my life. It's a > > good example to what happens if you decide to take OO design a > > couple of steps too far. > > What experience have you got with STL? What has it got to do with OOP? > Are you even aware of the fact the the (principal) STL creator, Alex > Stepanov, practically despises OOP? OK, to quote him fairly, he finds > OOP technically and philosophically unsound. > > Trying to make *my* ramblings informed at times, here is a reference: > > http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html > > Muli Ben-Yehuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > This message brought the you by the coalition against content free > > misinformed ramblings on linux-il. > > Hear, hear! ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
