On 02/10/2012 06:05 AM, Martin Desharnais wrote:
In my country's colleges and universities, C++ is in process to be replaced as a teaching and project developement language because there is no single place which could provide basic libraries for simple domains.
Most French universities already do C + Java and no C++. It's the same worldwide, some don't even do C anymore. That's to be expected, C is for learning and low-level programming, Java is for pulling together random software projects with minimal effort. I don't think more accessible C++ libraries would change that.
We, as students and new C++ developers, would like to have access to a simple, but still efficient XML library.
libxml2. It has a fairly good C++ wrapper, too.
I've read a fiew times that the DOM implementation, which is currently what we are use for, was not integrating well with C++ and could be made simpler.
DOM is an in-memory representation designed for Java and Java-like languages. In C++, there could arguably be better, but there is no particular problem providing that particular interface.
I will finish by saying that the biggest advantage of the boost libraries is that they all come together and that is a major argument when trying to convinced someone or an organisation that libraries are available (event if not in the standard) and that it will not be an installation and maintenance nightmare.
You could also install whatever you need locally. None of the computers I work with have Boost installed, I use my own version in my home directory (which allows me to use the version I want, including trunk).