Date: 2005-08-26 08:27:04
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave_at_[hidden]]
> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > When the test system introduced automatic memory leak detection, I
> > noticed for the first time that lots of the demos and tests had
> > memory leaks. It doesn't affect the validity of the demos and tests
> > but it does look a little sloppy. I'm reluctant to fix this as I'm
> > concerned about complicating the demos and diminishing their
> > tutorial value and about complicating the tests.
> IMO that's unacceptable for Boost. A naive user who follows a Boost
> example like a recipe could introduce errors into his organization's
> codebase. Who do you think the deveopment team manager will blame
> when he finds out the error was present in our example? Do you think
> they'll continue to have confidence in the quality of the Boost
> libraries they're using? I don't.
I strongly agree with this sentiment. I often direct colleagues and readers
of my articles to the Boost libraries' online documentation; knowing that
the documentation is generally of very high quality and accuracy.