From: Thomas Matelich (toms-mailing-lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-08 13:31:13
I'll have to preface this review by saying that I have never needed this idiom. I
don't know what that means, except that I had trouble picturing its usage in my own
code. I don't have much original to say, but as I reviewed the code, I felt I should
Like Bill Kempf, I equate this library with a singleton library, i.e. may have useful
features, but I'll probably write my own. In general, for a simple pattern, a general
framework leaves me feeling constrained. I like the documentation value, but usually
end up ripping out the framework and putting in a comment.
On the other hand, a lot of programmers out there haven't read the GoF book and don't
chase down pattern literature. I may be wrong, but I think Boost is opening some
people eyes to the power of STL and some of the really cool things you can do with
C++. So I'm in favor of finding a place in Boost for documenting C++ patterns/idioms,
with frameworks *and* descriptions of how to do it by hand. To the user who hates
writing 4 line classes, instantiating a template seems ok, and the framework provides
a reference implementation which documents the gotchas to be aware of.
So I guess my vote would be that I am in favor of finding a place in Boost for this
library, but I don't necessarily think that place is in utility.
-- Thomas O Matelich Senior Software Designer Zetec, Inc. matelich_at_[hidden] tmatelich_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk