DOOM-3-BFG VS Polly

The Bethesda representative said that they do not publish which OSS libraries they use but that they comply with any notice requirements. I admit, the claim on my side is somewhat thin, but there is one third party library (Base64.cpp) in DOOM 3 BFG that requires notice and states:

Even idTech 3 used third party components as listed in the description here: https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG. Newer versions of idTech use Vulkan for rendering. For that, they are basically forced to included the header files of Vulkan which are licensed under Apache 2. So it has to be mentioned somewhere.

I guess you can still write valuable software, even more complex than most people can write, with simple (03) C++. Like Doom 3: https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG

> What you are describing

On the other hand, I believe what you are describing is the exact meaning of FUD. In that precise order: "in C++ they have serious consequences" is fear, "There are bugs in the code--probably in your code--right now" is uncertainty, and "Some might be CVEs" is doubt.

According to https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG

Doom 3 was released in 2004. The engine has come to be known as "Id Tech 4", and it's open source. Written mostly in C++, looks like.

Id Tech 4 is currently Open Source (GPL licensed)

I believe doom 3 source is published on github so people can have a look for themselves if they want.

Doom 3 is a perennial favorite for "most beautiful C++ codebase" lists [0]

[0] https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG

In our applications, we should wrap all requests to remote services in code that implements a retry policy that follows one of the strategies I listed earlier. If you are a .NET developer like myself, you may be familiar with the Polly library. Golang has a library called Retry, and there are numerous third-party libraries for Python and Java.

Another question that rises is, would it be better to use some HttpClient package to handle the requests, like Refit in combination with Polly. But then again, it seems Refit also uses the HttpClient factory, which was a bad thing according to the previous?

D'Oh! Sorry, not PolySharp. I meant Polly. Too many similarly-named libraries!

Everywhere I've worked with AGs, we've worked with the application team to add retry logic to help make things a bit more seamless to end users. There are libraries out there that can make this pretty easy - Polly is one that I've used a few times, but there are others.

Fallacy 1: The network is reliable. If system 2 works perfectly well, but is not accessible for service 1 due to network issues, service 2 is still unavailable. This is why timeouts, service breakers and retry policies exist. A great tool for .NET to handle common network issues is Polly, but even when using a tool like this, the network is still not completely reliable.

I see. Then I don't have any better idea right now, but I do want to suggest that if your script is mostly API calls and you want to be able to deal with failures then take a look at the polly library: https://github.com/App-vNext/Polly

Runs in containers nicely, has good integration with Kafka, RabbitMQ, gRPC, etc. for Microservices communication. Implements resiliency patterns you'd want in Microservices via Polly. Has a decent Dependency Injection framework built in by default.

It's in no way hidden. But I use Polly all the time.

Depending if the sender or the reciever is down, you can also try Polly http://www.thepollyproject.org/