Re: [boost] [Review] Phoenix review starts today, September 21st

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Phoenix review starts today, September 21st
From: Daniel Walker (daniel.j.walker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-29 12:27:37

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Eric Niebler
<eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote:
>>
>> As I understand Joel's proposal he intends to never release V2 as a
>> top-level library but instead release V3 as an upgrade to
>> Boost.Lambda. That's certainly a good way to go, and I support it. But
>> if that's the case, let's review V3 when it's ready for review rather
>> than giving our stamp of approval to V2. Again, there are several
>> reasons V2 should remain in Boost.Spirit and not become a top-level
>> library: yet another incompatible bind, yet more incompatible
>> placeholders, etc. But there is every reason that V3 should eventually
>> become the top-level replacement of Boost.Lambda: extendability via
>> Proto, compatibility (at last) between lambda, bind,
>> std::placeholders, etc. So though I vote no on accepting V2 as a
>> top-level library, I support the plan and look forward to the actual
>> final product.
>
> I think your points are valid. IMO, a full (re-)review of v3 would largely
> cover the same ground as the current v2 review. Perhaps as a compromise, we
> could wind up the v2 review with a basic yea or nea. If we agree we want
> phoenix, we can put phoenix v3 up for a mini-review before it is merged to
> trunk. The review would focus on:
>
> - Whether the feedback from the v2 review was accommodated
> - The new extensibility mechanism
> - The breaking interface changes from v2
> - The migration path from lambda to phoenix
> - Interoperability with boost::bind and std::bind
> - Interoperability with other Proto-based DSELs
> - Compile times
>
> I see phoenix v3 as a hugely important step toward Boost's DSEL unification,
> so I'm generally in favor of getting more eyes on it before it's shipped.

This sounds reasonable to me. Could I vote for acceptance on the
condition of passage of a final code review prior to release? In other
words, release of the final V3 would be subject to a formal review and
a consensus vote that everything is good to go. Replacing Boost.Lambda
is a big enough deal to merit two reviews, actually.

Daniel Walker