Re: [boost] Review Request: pimpl

From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-12 17:57:57

Asger Mangaard wrote:
> I've uploaded a new suggestion, pimpl_ptr.zip with the name changed
> from pimpl to pimpl_ptr. Also included is a lot more documentation.

IMHO, even for such a small library that's still far from enough for 
formal review. For an example of what I would consider sufficient, have 
a look at the documentation of the optional library:

http://www.boost.org/libs/optional/doc/optional.html

Also, you might want to consider...

- that HTML is somewhat standard for boost documentation.
- that prepending identifiers with underscores makes your code 
non-portable.
- to add swap().
- to provide the strong exception guarantee for all functions.
- to put everything in established standard directories (e.g. doc, 
test).
- to add bjam files for you tests.

Feel free to have a look at code, docs & tests of other boost libraries 
to get a feeling what is commonly considered sufficient.

Regards,

-- 
Andreas Huber
When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap
from the address shown in the header.