Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Review wizard's report for October 2007

From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-18 16:54:21

Hi Ron,

Ronald Garcia wrote:
> On Sep 15, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Tobias Schwinger wrote:
>> Ronald Garcia wrote:
>>>
>>> Exception
>>> ---------
>>>      :Author: Emil Dotchevski
>>
>>>      :Review Manager: Need Volunteer
>> I'm, interested. As my time is limited right now, I'd need some for
>> proper pre-review inspection, though.
>>
> 
> Thank you for volunteering.  Could you give me a sense of how much  
> time you would need before you could schedule a review?

A few days, worst case.

>>> Libraries under development
>>> ===========================
>>>
>>> Please let us know of any libraries you are currently
>>> developing that you intend to submit for review.
>> The Boost X-files vol. 1, a collection of various utilities.
>>
>>      http://tinyurl.com/ynjq2n
>>
>> It contains some function objects, such as a brute-force solution  
>> to the
>> forwarding problem (to be factored out of Fusion) and generic  
>> factories.
>> Further, and most notably, it includes three thread-safe Singleton
>> templates with an easy-to-use, "Boost-style" interface.
>>
>> It's almost in review-ready state, so given the number of entries  
>> we can
>> probably put it in the queue right now.
>>
> 
> Thanks for the information.  I will add X-Files to the review queue.   
> I would like to list the three libraries (factory, singleton, and  
> forward) as separate reviews.  I think that this would make sense for  
> the purpose of reviewing.   Let me know if there is some reason to  
> review all three simultaneously.

Well, it's (what I call) a "non-intrusive attempt to make the Boost 
review process scale better". And actually it's X-files vol.1 as I had 
hoped others to join in - but there hasn't been much response, yet :-P.

I still think it's a good idea, however, because it seems (from 
developer comments) the formal overhead often gets in the way of 
applying useful factorizations. Further it's rather disproportional to 
spend a whole week reviewing a tiny utility while having just a few 
weeks for a large, framework-style submission.

For more "meta talk" on the issue see the introductory post 
http://tinyurl.com/3cjlqd .

So here's a concrete analysis for X-files vol.1:

1. Forward and Factory are related things, rather trivial and so tiny 
that even a Fast-Track review would be way over-sized,
2. Singleton probably provides enough of an interface for a Fast-Track, but
3. we should probably save review managers as they seem to be a rare 
resource, these days :-).

=> Seems one full review should be more than sufficient.

Regards,
Tobias