From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-29 21:55:02
"Hartmut Kaiser" wrote
> Hi all,
> normally, the review period of the Fixed Strings library written by Reece
> Dunn ended today. All we got so far are 3 reviews, which is too less to make
> a proper decision. I really would like to encourage you to submit a review
> for this library to get a representative result. For this reason I'ld like
> to extend the review period for another week until February 5th to allow for
> more reviews. I'm convinced, that a Fixed Strings library would make a good
> addition to Boost and in the end it should be useful to a lot more of people
> than to the 3 of us who send in a review.
A Fixed Strings library but this one? . What interests me is that the
fixed_string library is way ahead as the top download in the Vault download
list, but few reviewers have resulted. I feel the mystery can be explained
by the reviews so far. looking through them we have all said pretty much the
same thing. Surprise
that there is no overflow policy. Concern at the lack of detail in the
documentation and the way the documentation and the class itself are laid out.
IOW as currently implemented fixed_string isnt delivering what it seems to
promise. I hope Reece takes this in his stride by the way . I would guess that
has to be the
reason why so many downloads have resulted in so little response. It must be
worth analysing that lack of response as a first step in revisiting the design.
There must be some of the 421 downloaders of fixed_string that can shed some
light on this?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk