Subject: Re: [boost] Answers re BENUM library for automated enum streaming
From: Marcus Lindblom (macke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-19 04:53:24
(Sorry for not replying sooner)
Tony D wrote:
> Hi all,
> Should I expect any further feedback re BENUM? David, Marcus: we've discussed specific issues (portability of variadic macros, smart_enum features) - do you have further questions, comments re my replies, or recommended actions before submission for formal review? Should I be doing more to pursue suggestions or solicit feedback? Is anyone else currently reviewing the code in the vault, experiment with usage in a real system, or planning to do so? If so, can we keep in touch re progress? If I don't hear anything to the contrary this week, I'll start doing the preparations for requesting a formal review, specifically my TODO list currently looks like:
Small detail: My little embryo is called EnumIO, not smart_enum.
Smart_enum is probably something different altogether.
I'm quite happy with the answers, and I think it suits as a good
replacement for my lib. I took a brief look at the code, and besides it
not being formatted according to boost standards, it looked pretty ok.
I still think my little lib is useful, mainly because it doesn't rely on
exotic features and it can also be used in a non-intrusive fashion.
But I see no bigger conflict as your will probably win the future.
(Besides, I'll have to figure out a few things before I can publish mine
for review, as noted in the link I posted a few mails back. If I ever
get there there will probably be some discussion about integration, etc.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk