From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-05 09:38:21
>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of John Phillips
>Sent: 29 January 2007 14:15
>Subject: [boost] [Review] Review of the Accumulators library
>begins today,Jan 29
>The formal review of the Boost.Accumulators library, submitted by Eric
>Neibler begins today and ends on Wednesday, February 7. The library is
>Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
> . What is your evaluation of the design?
It looks to be a rather useful framework for handling incrementally arriving data.
It may also prove convenient where the data could just as well be handling in a plain array, vector or similar format.
(But what about compared to using Boost circular buffer?)
> . What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I can see why it is done this way and believe it is sound, but at a price of looking pretty intimidating, though probably easy
enough in practice.
I worry slightly about compile time and perhaps run time costs, but worth it.
Basic testing looks fine.
It would be a mistake now to focus too much on the detailed implementation/accuracy of actual functions - it is the framework that
However there is a danger, as with all statistical calculations, of confusing data with information.
For example, hardly any useful *information* on skewness or kurtosis is likely to emerge from a handful of values, even if
But the framework is templated so that one can envisage a floating-point type that adds uncertainty estimates as well as central
So we would know that the skew is -0.5 (but + or - a very lot).
> . What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Looks good, and has a good structure - but I haven't used it 'in anger' - when things are always missing/unclear.
> . What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
I am uncertain if it will meet a niche market - real-time systems seem the obvious applications, and yet I fear that those working
on these small machines - the 'toaster market ;-) may take fright at the apparent complexity, especially if the chip lacks built-in
floating point (but has a UDFPT).
> . Did you try to use the library?
Not much - some examples worked OK MSVC 8.0.
> . How much effort did you put into your evaluation?
Quickish read of docs, and some code and ran a few examples.
> . 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?
Yes - definitely.
--- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk