From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-15 17:20:41
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Thorsten Ottosen
>> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 12:05 PM
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: [boost] Numeric Conversion Formal Review
>> a.. What is your evaluation of the design?
> Looks OK, if complex.
> I only worry about the implications of C99 functions being included
> in the C++ Standard library (as seems very likely). This will provide
> some useful, but potentially overlapping functions.
AFAICT, there won't be any _overlap_, just __additional_ float 2 int
rounding functions that can be used with the Float2Int policy.
> Do we need to worry about this? If it is now know to be accepted, it
> least to be referenced.
>> b.. What is your evaluation of the implementation?
> Not tried to reproduce the tests.
>> c.. What is your evaluation of the documentation?
> OK, but could be improved. I note:
> 1 A fair number of spelling mistakes. (I offer to proof re-read
> after Guillaume Melquiond's substantive comments are done).
Opps.. OK, thanks for the proof reading.
> 2 Lacks a novices guide to using it in practice. I believe this is
> really necessary to ensure it gets used in practice.
> 3 Lacks (over)-commenting in examples.
> 4 Copyright info is outdated (last revision was Jan 2003?)
> (also Copyright outdated in code).
Ouch... right, way outdated.
> 5 I suspect more references would be helpful (C99?)
> 6 Most important, it lacks some typical real-life use examples /
> (and wouldn't it be nice we could arrange boost.css to provide colour
> for code sections?
> Green for comments are especially helpful. Can any html whizzes
> suggest how to do this easily, and portably?
> d.. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the
> Very useful.
>> e.. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you
>> have any problems?
> No. But the tests looked plausible.
>> f.. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A
>> quick reading? In-depth study?
> About 1 hour reading documentation and glancing at code.
>> g.. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
> Not anywhere near as knowledgable as other erudite reviewers, but
> have read the Goldberg article "What everyone should know about
> floating point". And Khan's "what you can learn about FP in 30
> minutes", so not totally novice.
>> h.. Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk