From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-18 11:15:56
>> As a related issue, would it make sense to also review the
>> hash_map/hash_set implementations at the same time
>> (assuming Daniel et al can finish it in time)?
> Sorry it took me a while to answer this. I haven't done much on these
> recently. I can get the implementation and tests ready in time, but I
> haven't done much in the way of documentation. I suppose if this is a
> part of Boost.TR1 that won't matter so much. I think this should be up
> to John? It seems a little late to be adding things.
I don't mind the hash tables being reviewed at the same time, but without
documentation (which is what most folks review), it'll be harder for people
to get to grips with it. Do you have a separate review scheduled yet? I
don't particularly see any problem with extending TR1 to adapt to new Boost
submissions that come along in the future.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk