From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-24 12:54:31
The formal review of the Boost TR1 Library by John Maddock begins today,
Saturday, September 24th, and runs through Wednesday, October 5th.
The TR1 library provides an implementation of the C++ Technical Report on
Standard Library Extensions. This library does not itself implement the TR1
components, rather it's a thin wrapper that will include your standard
library's TR1 implementation (if it has one), otherwise it will include the
Boost Library equivalents, and import them into namespace std::tr1.
Functionality supported includes:
* Reference Wrappers
* Smart Pointers
* Class template result_of.
* Function template mem_fn.
* Function Object Binders.
* Polymorphic function wrappers.
* Type Traits.
* Random Number Generators and Distributions.
* Tuple Interface to std::pair.
* Fixed Size Array.
* Hash Function Objects.
* Regular Expressions.
* Complex Number Algorithm Overloads.
* Complex Number Additional Algorithms.
Functionality in TR1 but not yet available:
* Mathematical Special Functions.
* Unordered Associative Set (Hash Table).
* Unordered Associative Map (Hash Table).
* C99 C language additions.
Additional information including online documentation is available at
The complete TR1 lib source and docs can be downloaded from
Please help Boost by posting your formal review of this library.
Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager
needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the
way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers.
Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
* What is your evaluation of the design?
* What is your evaluation of the implementation?
* What is your evaluation of the documentation?
* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have
* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?
* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
And finally, every review should answer this question:
* 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
--Beman Dawes, Review Manager
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk