BitShares Forum

Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: btswildpig on December 29, 2015, 04:31:04 am

Title: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: btswildpig on December 29, 2015, 04:31:04 am
How many developers uses the FC library ?

Why it seems there has been few effort to promote this tool ?

Is it good ? Is it bad ? Is it usable outside of this small circle ?


Is it one of the reasons that few developers have join the core development simply because they don't want to pay opportunity cost to learn a library that can only be used in a small project ?

Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: sittingduck on December 29, 2015, 04:36:54 am
Fc has been used in every project Bm has worked on. It is very useful much like boost.
Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: xeroc on December 29, 2015, 09:18:50 am
It is very useful much like boost.
+5%
Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: btswildpig on December 29, 2015, 09:42:13 am
It is very useful much like boost.
+5%

who is using it other than people that we know ?
Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: xeroc on December 29, 2015, 10:03:04 am
no one .. as far as I know
Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: ShineQi on January 30, 2018, 09:12:57 am
Is it one of the reasons that few developers have join the core development simply because they don't want to pay opportunity cost to learn a library that can only be used in a small project ?
I agree with this, opportunity cost is certainly a reason of few developers/contributors, the bitshares-fc library is out dated, it not work with latest boost library,  and due to poor documents, it cost lot of developer's time to take hands on the code. There're other folks of fc, steemit-fc https://github.com/steemit/fc (https://github.com/steemit/fc) and eos-fc https://github.com/EOSIO/eos/tree/master/libraries/fc (https://github.com/EOSIO/eos/tree/master/libraries/fc), but the differences of the three seems huge
Title: Re: Why FC library not a project ?
Post by: oxarbitrage on February 06, 2018, 09:47:31 pm
I agree that FC is hard, not documented and only used by graphene related projects. not only that, but every graphene project has it own version of FC, code can be "copied/cherrypicked" from one to the other but it is not a framework like boost where all the graphene use the same.

still, there are a few developers that had introduced some code in the last time into it, specific bugs had been fixed, bitshares-fc actually works with versions in the range of [1.57, 1.63], it used to work with up to 1.60 only a few months ago.

The development on it is slow as 1) it is not our top priority and 2) as stated, is complicated but it is not a dead project.

Inspired in this post i created a pull request to generate Doxygen documentation of FC at: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-fc/pull/12

there is a huge cleanup and sanitation of the code of bitshares-fc also coming soon, under review now: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-fc/pull/11