Hallo, IOhannes m zmoelnig hat gesagt: // IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
or rather, what are the big disadvantages of using flext ? i do not use it myself (since Gem has its own C++ framework and my rest is done in C), so my ideas of flext might be clouded. the only reason to not use it that is see, is an additional dependency. isn't it possible to link statically against flext, so the dependency would only exist at compile time ? or is the flext-api highly unstable (so that it is a pain to upgrade from one version of flext to the next ?)
Being the author of some flext externals myself I'd say, that using flext can be a disadvantage for users trying to compile the externals. However the advantages in using flext for me as developer outweight that, IMO. It is really well documented, very clean, has lots of useful utility functions and I need to use flext anyways for Thomas' cool externals, so flext is already installed.
And I like libraries and code reuse in general, so why should there be a different C++ interface for externals in Gem, PDcontainers, readanysf~, creb, ...?
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__