Re: Pervasiveness of STL
Paul wrote:
Does anyone know of stats or info indicating how what the uptake of
STL?
I had to look the "uptake" up in an attempt to understand what you are
asking :-)
Now I wonder how one would collect the "stats or info" of that nature?
How do you *measure* the uptake? Is it like a census, where you simply
ask, "what's your uptake of STL (from 0 to 5)"? And then, whom do you ask?
> It takes quite a while to read all the gotchas and best
practices (some of them more easily ingestible than others), but I
take pervasiveness as an indication of how such knowledge will be
streamlined. It also indicates how much momentum there will be in
improving the STL, smoothening out wrinkles and gaps, etc..
I [personally] don't see STL (or the Standard Library, as it is actually
called) as a singleton. It's a sm?rg?sbord. Yes, there are areas in
it, and there are certain concepts that are the underlying philosophy,
but you don't have to learn it all to use it (or even to improve it).
The philosophy, mind you, is *not* really complicated. And it is well
covered by some books that have been around for a while and endured
several editions/revisions.
The wrinkles and gaps are being worked on on an individual basis. Since
the underlying philosophy is stable, every part just needs a critical
mass of users to push the solution for any existing issue closer to the
Committee.
Just my $0.03 (adjusted for inflation)
V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask