ANN: POCO - C++ Portable Components
Hello all, David told me that the following announcement might be of interest in the Boost community, so here it goes ;-) I am happy to announce that POCO (the C++ Portable Components) is now under the Boost license, which makes it free for both open source and commercial use. Also, the new POCO Community Website is now online at http:// poco.appinf.com This is the place to meet the POCO developers and to discuss all things POCO. Contributors are welcome! About POCO: POCO, the C++ Portable Components, is a collection of open source class libraries that simplify and accelerate the development of network-centric, portable applications in C++. The libraries integrate perfectly with the C++ Standard Library and fill many of the functional gaps left open by it. Their modular and efficient design and implementation makes the C++ Portable Components extremely well suited for embedded development, an area where the C++ programming language is becoming increasingly popular, due to its suitability for both low-level (device I/O, interrupt handlers, etc.) and high-level object-oriented development. For more information, please visit http://poco.appinf.com Hope to meet you there, Günter -- Günter Obiltschnig Applied Informatics guenter.obiltschnig@appinf.com http://www.appinf.com P: +43 4253 32596 M: +43 676 5166737 F: +43 4253 32096 -------------------------------------------------------- The C++ Portable Components: http://poco.appinf.com
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 02:23:49PM +0200, Guenter Obiltschnig wrote:
David told me that the following announcement might be of interest in the Boost community, so here it goes ;-)
This is indeed very interesting! I take it you're aware of the related efforts within Boost and the C++ library working group: There's Chris Kohlhoff's great asio [1], and my proposal to add networking to the standard library [2]. It's encouraging to see there's movement in this area. [1] http://asio.sourceforge.net/ [2] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1925.pdf Regards -Gerhard -- Gerhard Wesp ZRH office voice: +41 (0)44 668 1878 ZRH office fax: +41 (0)44 668 1818 For the rest I claim that raw pointers must be abolished.
It looks impressive! I'd recommend doing some basic search-engine-optimization to get it to show on searches. Specially for people looking for "C++", "Framework", "Toolkit", etc. You have no idea how many of us search for those keywords regularly. It's hillarious! I was writing my own BinaryWriter and BinaryReader, I'm glad I read your post. I will read more about POCO and see how can I contribute. Good luck, Steven "Guenter Obiltschnig" <guenter.obiltschnig@appinf.com> wrote in message news:3A5EA110-8705-43AB-87C8-093A8B7F3F1C@appinf.com... Hello all, David told me that the following announcement might be of interest in the Boost community, so here it goes ;-) I am happy to announce that POCO (the C++ Portable Components) is now under the Boost license, which makes it free for both open source and commercial use. Also, the new POCO Community Website is now online at http:// poco.appinf.com This is the place to meet the POCO developers and to discuss all things POCO. Contributors are welcome! About POCO: POCO, the C++ Portable Components, is a collection of open source class libraries that simplify and accelerate the development of network-centric, portable applications in C++. The libraries integrate perfectly with the C++ Standard Library and fill many of the functional gaps left open by it. Their modular and efficient design and implementation makes the C++ Portable Components extremely well suited for embedded development, an area where the C++ programming language is becoming increasingly popular, due to its suitability for both low-level (device I/O, interrupt handlers, etc.) and high-level object-oriented development. For more information, please visit http://poco.appinf.com Hope to meet you there, Günter -- Günter Obiltschnig Applied Informatics guenter.obiltschnig@appinf.com http://www.appinf.com P: +43 4253 32596 M: +43 676 5166737 F: +43 4253 32096 -------------------------------------------------------- The C++ Portable Components: http://poco.appinf.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Hi, isn´t this just about reinventing the wheel again. AFAIK, most of the functionality is still covered by ACE. What is the main difference then? Greetings Roman
Well yes, we all reinvent the wheel all the time in C++ It's something the Java or the C# guys don't have to do but sadly we have to because the standard library is simply lacking. For instance, how many custom String classes are out there? hundreds! but who can blame them if std::string doesnt even have a trim() method! So, as long as we dont have a standard wheel that's good enough, we will keep seeing the wheel getting reinvented over and over again. Steven "Roman Morokutti" <roman_vbg@web.de> wrote in message news:e9o63m$9cl$1@sea.gmane.org... Hi, isnŽt this just about reinventing the wheel again. AFAIK, most of the functionality is still covered by ACE. What is the main difference then? Greetings Roman _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 09:28:17AM -0600, Steven Burns wrote:
who can blame them if std::string doesnt even have a trim() method!
This should, of course, be a free function. :-) *ducksandruns* -Gerhard -- Gerhard Wesp ZRH office voice: +41 (0)44 668 1878 ZRH office fax: +41 (0)44 668 1818 For the rest I claim that raw pointers must be abolished.
On 7/20/06, Gerhard Wesp <gwesp@google.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 09:28:17AM -0600, Steven Burns wrote:
who can blame them if std::string doesnt even have a trim() method!
This should, of course, be a free function. :-)
*ducksandruns*
not in locale_aware_bloat_string! :P *runsawaytoo*
Hi Steven, as you quoted, the STL lacks. But it ever has has been thought of a general purpose library. My thoughts were that POCO is a bit a clone of ACE and was not intended to discuss the pros and cons of the STL. (Let´s open this book on a separate Thread ;-)) So, whats the main difference between POCO and ACE? Roman
Alright, Steven "Roman Morokutti" <roman_vbg@web.de> wrote in message news:e9ofv4$fn8$1@sea.gmane.org... Hi Steven, as you quoted, the STL lacks. But it ever has has been thought of a general purpose library. My thoughts were that POCO is a bit a clone of ACE and was not intended to discuss the pros and cons of the STL. (LetŽs open this book on a separate Thread ;-)) So, whats the main difference between POCO and ACE? Roman _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Hi, On Jul 20, 2006, at 19:53 , Roman Morokutti wrote:
Hi Steven,
as you quoted, the STL lacks. But it ever has has been thought of a general purpose library. My thoughts were that POCO is a bit a clone of ACE and was not intended to discuss the pros and cons of the STL. (Let´s open this book on a separate Thread ;-))
So, whats the main difference between POCO and ACE?
Well, I wouldn't exactly see POCO as a clone of ACE. There may be some similarities and minor influences (design pattern wise), but POCO has been designed without looking at ACE as a role model, or whatever. Why POCO? Well, there is a nice article at the project's weblog (http://appinf.com/poco/blog/?p=4), written by one of our contributors. Basically, POCO is the library I always wanted to have for C++. While I prefer C++ to Java and .NET (for me, Java and C# just don't feel right...), the main envy I have of them is the extensive class library that they come with. I wanted to have something similar for C+ +. And I wanted something that's easy and fun to use. Even if I have to compromise some (but not much) flexibility for it. I guess it's similar to Ruby-on-Rails vs. J2EE. While J2EE is certainly more powerful and flexible, RoR programming is much more fun, and you get most things done faster, too. Getting things done fast - I guess that's one of the main ideas behind POCO. I never really looked at ACE. I always found the 20M download kind of intimidating. And for some reason it always had this 'early 90's C++ touch' for me. This might not be true anymore, I don't know, and I really don't care. With software, I guess, it's with all the other things in life. There is no one thing that fits everyone. So there are lots of developers that prefer Boost or ACE. There are also some (already) that prefer POCO. And there are many that prefer something else entirely. A lot of personal taste, experience, preferences are involved in the choice of our tools. Otherwise we would all drive the same car, or use the same programming language. The world is not that way. Fortunately. Best regards, Guenter -- Günter Obiltschnig Applied Informatics guenter.obiltschnig@appinf.com http://www.appinf.com P: +43 4253 32596 M: +43 676 5166737 F: +43 4253 32096 -------------------------------------------------------- The C++ Portable Components: http://poco.appinf.com
Even though I have used boost libraries for a while, this was the first time I read about ACE and POCO. I've used Java's and C#'s libraries for years wishing something similar existed for C++ and POCO seems to be a step in this direction. Regarding ACE, I haven't read that much. The site kept me jumping from page to page and it looked kind of "academic" if you ask me. Steven
participants (5)
-
Gerhard Wesp -
Guenter Obiltschnig -
me22 -
Roman Morokutti -
Steven Burns