From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-20 04:49:16
Jody Hagins wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:53:32 +0100
> "John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>What is your evaluation of the design?
> It seems fairly representative of current meta template programming
> techniques. I still have concerns about the tag-types bastraction.
> However, I also see the advantages. Maybe BOTH style interfaces should
> be provided, even though it is largely redundant. Normally redundant
> interfaces are a bad thing, but I'm on the fence here...
This has been brought up by several reviewers, now. I've come to the conclusion
that some common cases available as unary traits classes (e.g.
'is_function_pointer') are indeed helpful.
I'm also thinking about introducing more orthogonality in the tag logic
(inspired by Jonathan Turkanis' proposal) to increase its usability (and
explainability, for that matter). I'll post a draft, later today.
>>What is your evaluation of the documentation?
> As obvious from my previous comments in this thread, the documentation
> need a lot of work. In addition, I think a single example, developed
> throught the documentation would be helpful. A modified version
> includes better examples, but the examples need to be fully explained
> with lots of textual explanation (more than currently exists).
>>Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be
>>sure to say
>>this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall
> Yes, though I would regret that vote if the documentation and examples
> were not given a thorough re-working, taking into account all the
> current feedback (and applying that feedback, pretty much all of which
> would make the documentation much better, and the library more useful).
The docs will be reworked with most suggestions applied and a tutorial will be
Thank you for your review and for the positive vote!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk