Re: [boost] [function types][review] (repost with new formatting)

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-13 14:41:57

From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>

Thanks for the repost.  I, too, can read it now.

> >   Motivation
> >
> >   Applying metaprogramming to increase the flexibility of software
> >   design often involves the inspection and manipulation of function
> >   types.
> >
> >   A very common application is the automatic generation of callback
> >   facilities which occurs frequently in Boost libraries, such as Bind,
> >   Lambda, Phoenix and Function.
> 
> This is a very weak opening.  A person reading the Motivation section
> wants to know, "what would I do with this library?"  I suggest

Absolutely right.

> something like:
> 
>   Generic libraries that accept callable arguments are common in C++:
>   STL, Boost.Lambda, Boost.Function, and Boost.Python are just a few
>   examples.  Analysis and manipulation of built-in function types
>   seems to appear in each one.
> 
> The above is by no means perfect, and it took me 5 minutes to write.
> It can be hard to follow Mr. White's advice ;-)

I question why you say "seems to appear."  It should be possible
to state it definitively, right?

That aside, this is still lacking.  It tells me that powerful
tools that one might consider black boxes need the functionality
of this library, but says nothing about why the reader may.

> "With one exception, each component is defined in a header file whose
> name is the same as that of the component, with an .hpp suffix.  For
> example, before using is_function_type, your functions should first

s/functions/code/

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;