On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 02:04:29PM +0100, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > > There is always a choice. > > Yes, the choice is there. It's only that We take it. ;)
No, it's like making Us think we take it ;-) > No, I'm joking. Ah well, I am a bit joking... We haven't got too much abuse for two weeks or so and missed a Friday or two... > Only that for learning something, I would like to have > explanations on these decisions. > > For instance, is not that the boost graph code fits like a glove. It doesn't > have f.ex. shortpath searches with multiple sources. Nothing that cannot be > overcomed, but I don't expect the code using boost to be extraordinary > shorter than the one I sent. That's the point. If the interface to boost is as much work as doing a thing ourselves I lean to the do-it-yourself side. > Also, how much testing does the boost graph library has? How widely used is? > (I'm asking because I don't know) boost is de facto Standard. People ignoring the Standard are likely to ignore boosts existence as well, the rest is aware of boost and uses a thing or two from it. At least that's my impression. > Hmm... the pseudo code you posted for short path was 75 lines long... Yes, but it does a bit more, like incorporating costs for the nodes as well, not just edge weights... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
