Boost logo

Boost :

From: Marco (mrcekets_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-09 11:20:57

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:45:29 +0200, Dean Michael Berris
<mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>> Thanks for the advice. I registered to boost vault and uploaded my
>> implementation to it.
>> I thought that the boost vault was reserved to boost developers.
>> This is the link:
> Great! This should make it available to more people. :)
>> And thanks a lot for the documentation that you're writing. :-)
> You're welcome. :)
> (I'm also thinking of writing a bit more tests just to make sure it's
> covered pretty well, and if I get the time write some in-line
> documentation and perhaps split up the file into appropriate header
> files. There's also a recommended Boost library directory structure,
> and I'll try coming up with that as well.)
> To the moderators on the list: I'm not sure how the subversion access
> works, but will it be alright if this library continues to get
> developed in the sandbox? Is there a specific process for that? And
> would this be a candidate for a mini-review once the appropriate
> documentation and "boostification" process gets done? Or would this
> merit a full review just like the other libraries that try to become
> part of the Boost C++ Library?

Well obviously the proposed and uploaded implementation needs still a lot
of testing.
About directory and namespace organization, this my point of view:

in namespace boost::overloads::detail

should be put all the helper functions and metafunctions

in namespace boost::overloads

the overload class and all the type information helper utilities
( has_signature<Sig, overload_type>, signature<N, overload_type>,
   extent<overload_type>, ...)

then only the overload class is made available in the boost namespace
through a using overloads::overload;

with the source code belonging to namespace boost::overloads but not
to namespace boost::overloads::detail
with the source code belonging to namespace boost::overloads::detail only.

These are just my speculations, I don't know if they fit with
the boostification process, moreover we should take into account
the possibility to include the new code straight into boost.function.
But, IMO, this kind of decisions are up to boost moderators
and the authors of boost.function.

Marco Cecchetti

Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at