RE: [boost] [Review] Named parameters library

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-14 13:51:03

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Doug Gregor
| Sent: 12 November 2004 13:44
| To: Boost mailing list
| Cc: boost-announce_at_[hidden]
| Subject: [boost] [Review] Named parameters library
| 
| The formal review of the Named Parameters library by David 
| Abrahams and 
| Daniel Wallin starts today and runs until Monday, November 22nd.
| 
| 	- What is your evaluation of the design?

Looks as though it works for most situations.

| 	- What is your evaluation of the implementation?

- but IMHO a klever kludge.

| 	- What is your evaluation of the documentation?

OK.

| 	- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness 
| of the  library?

Well there is DEFINITELY a need for named parameters.
Why didn't the language have it to start with?

| 	- Did you try to use the library? 
NO
| 	- How much effort did you put into your evaluation?

A glance.

| 	- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

No
 
| As always, please remember to clearly state whether you believe the 
| library should be accepted into Boost.

I don't really like it - because I would VERY MUCH
prefer the C++ Language to do this job properly.
I don't image it will _improve_ compile times :-(

Meanwhile, I suppose this may be popular with some,
(even if some people may get into trouble with it),
and it may show how much people like using named parameters,
which may in turn provide a incentive to get it into the language proper.

And those that don't like it, need not use it, so it seems fairly low risk.

Paul

Paul A Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
[phone]  [phone]
mailto: pbristow_at_[hidden]