From: Jody Hagins (jody-boost-011304_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-19 13:03:51
The review ends in three days (on Wednesday). The current collection of
reviews is very small, thus I am asking for more reviews of this
>From the original announcement...
The review period for Scope Exit Time Series, submitted by Alexander
Nasonov, runs from Monday, August 13 until Wednesday, August 22.
>From the documentation:
Nowadays, every C++ developer is familiar with RAII technique. It binds
resource acquisition and release to initialization and destruction of a
variable that holds the resource. But there are times when writing a
special class for such variable is not worth the effort.
This is when ScopeExit macro comes into play. You put resource
acquisition directly in your code and next to it you write a code that
releases the resource.
Note that ScopeExit uses PP macros and relies on Boost.Typeof.
The latest version can is here:
It's available also at http://tinyurl.com/2z6qg2
Online documentation is here:
>From the review guidelines here:
Boost mailing list members are encouraged to submit Formal Review
* Publicly on the mailing list.
* Privately to the Review Manager.
Private comments to a library submitter may be helpful to her or him,
but won't help the Review Manager reach a decision, so the other forms
What to include in Review Comments
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
* 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 overall opinion.
Thanks in advance to every for your participation in this review.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk