Hacker News Reader

Comment by Edmond | Hacker News Reader

I don't do C++ anymore but for folks interested in C++ and what the project is describing, I'd urge dropping the knee-jerk prejudice against the license terms and actually try to see what it is all about.

Unless they are crazy, someone doesn't spend a decade or more working on something that isn't worth it. I think people also grossly under-estimate the creative power of a singular vision (ie not done by committee with a million employees involved.)

It is clear this is not vaporware, give it a chance.

View on HN

Okay, here's my feedback ignoring license terms:

It reminds me of https://templeos.org/, which is also decades of a single man's work. CIDLib doesn't really do anything that isn't already done elsewhere, and its organization is very strange with odd, antiquated names. Definitely reminds me of C++ you'd find in Windows 3.1 programs.

For example: what is "CIDMacroDbg.hpp"? Ah,

    This is the main public header for the facility. It is the single point
    of contact for the outside world. By including it, they get what we
    have to offer.

Uhh..

I had read Terry's story and was sadden by it.

I see no conflict between the two approaches....As far as I am concerned, progress is progress.

I have been watching the CIDLib videos (ie CQC) and it appears to be a comprehensive IoT type platform covering almost every aspect of deploying an IoT type solution, including a drag-n-drop IDE to create control applications (think old DirectX filter programming but on steroid). I am sure there is room for improvement.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJojk5z5q10SRUTLqEGfJ...

I think it is worth looking at, regardless of license term.

> it appears to be a comprehensive IoT type platform covering almost every aspect of deploying an IoT type solution, including a drag-n-drop IDE to create control applications (think old DirectX filter programming but on steroid).

This is more informative on what the project offers than the entire readme. I think this is the point people are making. Great that you took the time to watch some videos and summarize here but this sort of information would be much more useful in the first paragraph of the readme.

Sorry for the changed name, I closed the tab before before entering an e-mail and had forgotten the password...

Anyway, that'a not what CIDLib is. That's what CQC is. CQC is something that's BUILT on top of CIDLib.

If you need some sort of reference point for CIDLib, think Qt without the STL plus build tools or something like that.

why it's got down voted? there are reasonable points.

The bar is not "possibly has some value" it is "plausibly has more value than other interesting projects one could spend time investigating". That includes other projects that are the product of a singular vision, like the STL somewhat ironically.

Before that, there's the documentation bar of "does it claim to do something useful enough, in a special enough and/or good enough way, to consider its possible use". The "singular vision" needs to be explained in detail.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com