New Real Time Battle

Do we use Boost or POCO?

Asked by Rick Stovall

A few days ago I sent POCO (pocoproject.org) out to the core team for review and so far have received little feedback. I'm ready to start coding on the transceiver, which will be used by both SimEngine and Databroker and a quick decision is needed so I can go forward.

Question: Is there any reason POCO is unacceptable the core support library set for our C++ components?

Overview: http://pocoproject.org/documentation/PoCoOverview.pdf
Documentation: http://pocoproject.org/docs/

NOTE: In the absence of feedback by 1800 on 2010-12-20 I will mark this question as resolved and proceed with development using POCO on my authority as project lead. I'd much rather have a group consensus, but I don't want to hold up development too much longer.

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
New Real Time Battle Edit question
Assignee:
Rick Stovall Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Rick Stovall (fpstovall) said : 		#1

Per the earlier notes on this question, the discussion period has expired on this question. POCO is now our our primary C++ utility library set, replacing boost in that role.

Revision history for this message
Rick Stovall (fpstovall) said : 		#2

Rick Stovall suggests this article as an answer to your question:
FAQ #1072: “Alpha Development FAQ”.

Revision history for this message
Rick Stovall (fpstovall) said : 		#3

After some poking around, we've gone back to boost for almost everything except logging. That said, we are still using Rick's custom classes for socket communications, threads, and configuration handling. This may change later in the development cycle, but for now that's the pattern in actual use.