About "dlw_oprs.zip" version 23 (was: Re: Status on "dlw_oprs.zip"?)

From: darylew_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-04-24 00:25:24

I've changed the (regular) operator and conversion tests to use 
the Test Tools library.  The iterator test is unchanged from when I 
last factored out code.

--- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <abrahams_at_m...> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daryle Walker" <darylew_at_m...>
> 
> > I know there's been a lot of stuff going on since I last 
mentioned
> > "dlw_oprs.zip" (at version 15 in the vault), but does everyone 
think it's
> > good to go?  Are there any remaining big problems?
> >
> > For those that have come in late, this archive contains an 
update to
> > <boost/operators.hpp> that has:
> >
> > +   New operator templates for shifting, unary+, etc.
> > +   New templates the compose other templates together (- 
and +)
> > +   Re-implemented old grouped templates in terms of the 
new ones
> > +   Added iterator helper templates for input and output 
iterators
> > +   Completely redone documentation (requires HTML 4)
> 
> I think this last point may be a problem. Last time I checked, 
many
> Unix/Linux users have only older versions of Netscape which 
don't support
> things like &ldquo; and &rdquo;.
> 
> &harr; is unknown to IE5 for Windows. I think we may have to 
stick to HTML
> versions < 4.0 for the time being.

OK.

> The documentation looks quite good, with the following 
noticeable problems
> remaining:
> 
> > Summary of Template Semantics
> 
> > Each operator class template completes the concept(s) it 
describes by
> filling
> > in operators missing from a target class. A template can 
implement its new
> > operators by using existing base class operations (which 
would be
> > required). Specifically:
> 
> What does "which would be required" mean above?
> This entire section is good, but needs some English usage 
cleanup. I would
> be happy to do that myself.
> 
> The section titled "Use of Concepts" contains the word "expect" 
where
> "except" was intended, I expect ;-)
> 
> > The user should be aware of the following points for using 
this library:
> 
> This single body sentence for the "Usage" section adds 
nothing and should be
> stricken
> 
> The link to the GOTW site needs to be updated. It still works, if 
you wait
> long enough, but I get the feeling that will change eventually.
> 
> > Seperate, Explicit Instantiation
>   ^^^^^^^^ should be "separate"

I fixed all of these.

> I'm unhappy with the way the tables show up in my browser. 
The middle column
> tends to wrap unneccessarily in every row, causing lots of 
vertical bloat. I
> think this could be fixed by forcing some line breaks in the 
rightmost
> column of the xxx_convertible rows, but probably an HTML 
expert like you
> knows a better way.

I'm not sure that there's a best solution.  I've put up something 
that works on one of my browsers, but I don't know how good it is 
for everyone else.

> I realize we've gone back and forth over this name, but with 
fresh eyes I
> find "negatable" confusible with the idea of unary operator-(). I 
also buy
> Alexy's argument that it is a completely useless template that 
adds no
> functionality. I would like to see it removed.

OK.

Daryle
[posting through web interface]