From: Mark Rodgers (mark.rodgers_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-17 04:42:55
Thanks for your very helpful comments. I was beginning to worry
that we were about to find out what happens if we have a review
and no-one had anything to say...
I'm working through your points and making pretty much all the
changes you suggest. A couple of comments about your comments:
>I would add an explanatory note that libraries allowing LISP-
>like lambda-expressions with a more natural syntax are currently
>under development, but these may not work with certain popular
Yes, I definitely intend to do this, as suggested by Gary Powell
previously. Do you or Gary have a preferred wording?
>General: Is there any boost preference which English language
>variation to use (US -ize vs. British -ise etc.)?
Slightly off topic, but ...
It is a common misconception that the British (and New Zealanders)
can't write -ize, and presumably that Americans never need -ise.
My dictionary (Concise Oxford) says:
"The form -ize has been in use in English since the 16th c.;
it is widely used in American English, but it is not an
Americanism. The alternative spelling -ise (reflecting a
French influence) is in common use, and is obligatory in
certain cases: (a) where it forms part of a larger word
element, such as -mise (=sending) in compromise, and -prise
(=taking) in surprise, and (b) in verbs corresponding to
to a noun with -s- in the stem, such as advertise and
So yes, I'm certainly at liberty to use -ize in certain cases
(e.g., specialize), but in general I prefer -ise because I'm less
likely to be wrong. But since I'm sure Americans are equally
at liberty to use -ise, does anyone really care?
> Is there any reason why this file is called "index.htm", but the
> rest has the (IMHO proper) ".html" suffix?
Because I agree with you that ".html" is proper, but was under
the (incorrect) impression that index.htm was required by Boost
standards. A couple of other libraries (compose and dir_it) do
the same thing.
>For additional English beauty, try "If this typedef were not
Only someone who had learned English as a second language would
spot the need for the subjunctive! :-) Most native speakers
wouldn't know what it was, and only use it sporadically. You are
correct of course.
>In section "Argument Passing", "Accordingly, the negators in this
>library (mem_fun1_t and its variants)...". It is news to
>me that "mem_fun1_t" is a negator.
It's certainly news to me too! :-) I guess it must have been a
copy and paste error.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk