Re: [Boost-users] [Review] ITL review starts today, February 18th

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Review] ITL review starts today, February 18th
From: John Reid (j.reid_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-03 12:59:29

Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> The ITL is available from the boost vault:
> http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=itl_3_2
> _0.zip&directory=Containers
I have to say first I have been evaluating the version of ITL called 
itl_plus_3_2_1 rather than the version in the boost vault. Perhaps 
someone can tell me whether that is a big mistake or not.

> 
> Please always state in your review, whether you think the library should be
> accepted as a Boost library.
I think it should be accepted subject to the inclusion of an interval 
tree implementation.

> 
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
I suspect that making the open/closedness of an interval a template 
parameter would suit more users although I don't have a strong opinion 
on this one.

> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I would have liked to see interval trees in the implementation. For what 
I've needed the library for so far this has not been a problem as most 
of the intervals don't overlap. In the future I can see use cases where 
the lack of interval trees would make the library impractical. I don't 
know how much impact adding an interval tree implementation would have 
on the existing interface.

> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Good. A tutorial would be a welcome addition. Some functions were 
undocumented, I'm assuming they're documented in the review version.

> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very useful. It seems to have many applications in several different 
domains.

> - Did you try to use the library?  With what compiler?  Did you have any
> problems?
I used gcc 4.4.1 and boost.python to make a python module for most of 
the main elements of the library. I used this module successfully in an 
application in genomics. However so far I have only had use for the 
SplitIntervalMap so I have not used most of the library.

> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?
A reasonable amount - enough to get up to speed and use the library.

> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
Not especially.