Re: [boost] [beast] Formal review

On 7/12/2017 8:43 PM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:

...

Boost has two state machine libraries. Did you look at either of them for your uses ?

No. The thought of introducing a dependency on a library dedicated only to large scale state machines never crossed my mind. Have you seen the state machine in question? Here's a typical example: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast/blob/ceeb354424bb00474bbf713450b1d03de1...

I want to make a general point: You can always use library X, even if the library encompasses much more than you need in your own library or application. I have never understood why software developers are afraid of creating a dependency on some other library when that library solves some software problem which makes some other software module easier to code or understand. I see no advantage of developers rolling their own solution when some other library has already solved the particular software problem in an elegant and useful manner. I neither know nor can judge whether your particular solution is better/worse than using a ready-made library. I was just surprised when you say that the thought never crossed your mind, considering that you described your code as a state machine and Boost has to state machine libraries, one fairly low level and one at a higher level. But if you think using either library would have been overkill that is understandable. Still I myself would have at least investigated the other libraries, if indeed you are implementing a state machine in your code as you say.

Thanks