Re: [boost] Review: lambda library

From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-22 23:49:34

On Friday 22 March 2002 07:37 pm, you wrote:
> However, here's my dilemma (perhaps it's better to say this now): We
> (the group behind the Spirit inline parser) are preparing for a formal
> boost submission of Spirit. We are very close. We are now at version
> 1.3.x. As soon as we get to v1.4.x, we will ask for a formal review.
> Although Phoenix is stand-alone from the main Spirit code, we might
> have to package it along with Spirit (Phoenix is a Spirit sub-project,
> BTW). There are some important issues that LL does not address yet.
> One important issue is extensibility (I've posted my opinions
> regarding this). Phoenix is designed to be extended. That might not
> mean much to the typical programmer who wants to use it as a
> replacement for STL's binders, but for library writers like me, this
> is crucial. There are other concerns; I guess I don't have to restate
> them here, please see my previous posts.

Knee-jerk reaction: will Spirit be bound to Phoenix? What I mean is, will I 
be able to use LL or bind to create Spirit semantic actions?

I'm always concerned with big libraries. It's hard for reviewers to give good 
feedback on a large library, and it would really help if Spirit were 
introduced and reviewed in pieces: e.g., core parser, multipass iterator, 
Phoenix all as separate _independent_ chunks. It's also much less to digest 
at once: a reviewer can pick up Spirit's parser syntax, but stay with a more 
familiar (to him or her) binding library for the actions. 

        Doug