From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-23 01:10:43
Beman Dawes wrote:
> Attached is another draft, including most of Aleksey's ideas.
> But the ordering is my own, based purely on intuition. It feels
> right to me, but I'd like to hear comments from Aleksey or
> others before I check it into CVS.
I really like it. A few comments:
1) "Function objects" category is missed from the "libraries list by
category" on the top of the page.
2) I think that having overlapping categories is not a bad thing, even if
they contain almost the same set of libraries; in particular, I wonder if I
am the only one who would like to see "Higher-order programming" category in
the document, even although "Function objects" covers the most (all?) of the
(current) libraries we have. Funny as it might be, for me "Function objects"
just wouldn't ring a bell loud enough if I was looking for the library like
'boost::function' (or not-yet-submitted 'lambda').
3) IMO it would be better to have separate "Template metaprogramming" and
"Generic programming" categories instead of the single "Generic Programming
and Template Metaprogramming helpers"; "helpers" word seems to restrict the
category too much (not all template metaprogramming libraries are "helpers"
libraries :), not to mention that the name of the "coupled" category is just
too long ;).
4) 'static_assert' library is not listed under "Generic Programming..."
category, and IMO it should be.
5) I like the order! I would place "Data structures" and "Memory" categories
before "Inter-language support" and "Correctness and testing", though; just
a personal opinion, of course.
6) Nitpicking aside, the page looks great!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk