Boost logo

Boost :

From: Herve Bronnimann (hbr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-26 17:11:36

On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:41:05PM +0200, Thomas Witt wrote:
> > Just how small is it?
> 600+ lines header and on html file.

T'is true.

> After thinking some more about this I came to the conclusion that we should
> find a way to review algorithms one by one. Waiting for the one big algorithm
> lib might not be such a good idea. Furthermore I think that the review effort
> will not be that big.
First I would agree with that. Furthermore, I think minmax and minmax_element
are very natural and might be excellent candidates for the C++ standard, and I was looking forward to get comments esp. on this in preparation (to weed out any problems that might show up, although I don't see any right now).

I agree that it would be nicer to put everything in one big library, but
the benefits of reviewing separately is also not negligible (who wants
to review 10,000+ lines of code? whereas 600 can be done easily in a
short period of time, hence not disrupting the reviewer's other

Ten days for it may be an overkill, but in order to let people have a
chance to look at it, t'is fine with me. Could be pooled with other
libraries in the same time though, to have parallel reviews. Those who
want to review everything at once can do it, and the others, well, they
can take it one a day at a time.

My thoughts.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at