Re: [boost] [Review] Named parameters library

From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-17 17:30:25

On 11/12/04 8:43 AM, "Doug Gregor" <dgregor_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> The formal review of the Named Parameters library by David Abrahams and
> Daniel Wallin starts today and runs until Monday, November 22nd.

Did you put this notice on the announce list?

> The Named Parameters library provides a framework for writing functions
> that can accept arguments by name  or by position. The use of named
> parameters can improve the readability of calls to these functions,
> especially when the functions have many parameters with default values.
> The Named Parameters library allows one to write a new_window function
> that allows a call such as:
> 
> window* w = new_window("alert2", movable = true);
> 
> The library is available in the Boost sandbox here:
> 
> boost/named_params.hpp
> libs/utility
> 
> And in the files area (login required):
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/named_params.zip
> 
> Reviewers may wish to compare this solution to the named parameters
> already used by the Boost Graph Library, documented here:
> 
> http://www.boost.org/libs/graph/doc/bgl_named_params.html

This new solution looks nicer that what's given in Boost.Graph.  I haven't
looked at the implementation of Boost.Graph's solution, though.

> Please send your reviews either to the Boost list or to me personally.
> The former is preferred, because it allows the community to consider
> your review as well. When writing your review, you may wish to consider
> the following questions (from
> http://www.boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm#Comments)
> 
> - What is your evaluation of the design?

It looks OK.

> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?

I don't really understand it (yet) since it's heavy with Boost's
buzzword-worthy libraries.

> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?

It's OK.

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

It only needs to be used for functions with many arguments, especially if
the order was arbitrary.  Code that otherwise doesn't use Boost's
heavy-hitter libraries may want to skip it.

> - Did you try to use the library?  With what compiler?  Did  you have
> any problems?

It seems to have worked on my system (Mac OS X 10.3.6 using Apple's custom
GCC).

> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?

A quick reading

> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Not really, unless you count how my proposed basic_ios_form works

> As always, please remember to clearly state whether you believe the
> library should be accepted into Boost.

Yes.

-- 
Daryle Walker
Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
darylew AT hotmail DOT com