Subject: [boost] [Review] Reminder: Polynomial library review ends soon
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-17 14:24:08
Just a reminder that the review of the polynomial lib ends on Thursday, the
original announcement is below.
> The review of Pawel Kieliszczyk's Polynomial library begins today and ends
> on Thurs 19th March.
> Download of the zip file from the vault is here:
> Otherwise the library is present in the sandbox here:
> And the docs can be read online here:
> The polynomial library contains a single class - polynomial<FieldType> -
> used for the manipulation of polynomials, along with a selection of
> algorithms which operate upon them. The library is an extension/rewrite
> the existing "implementation detail" polynomial class in Boost.Math, and
> written as part of last years Google Summer of Code under the mentorship
> Fernando Cacciola.
> 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.
> The goal of a Boost library review is to improve the library through
> constructive criticism, and at the end a decision must be made: is the
> library good enough at this point to accept into Boost? If not, we hope to
> have provided enough constructive criticism for it to be improved and
> accepted at a later time. The Serialization library is a good example of
> constructive criticism resulted in revisions resulting in an excellent
> library that was accepted in its second review.
> 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 library?
> * Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
> * 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.
> Many reviews include questions for library authors. Authors are interested
> in defending their library against your criticisms; otherwise they would
> have brought their library up for review. If you don't get a response to
> your question quickly, be patient; if it takes too long or you don't get
> answer you feel is sufficient, ask again or try to rephrase the question.
> remember that English is not the native language for many Boosters, and
> can cause misunderstandings.
> E-mail is a poor communication medium, and even if messages rarely get
> in transmission, they often get drowned in the deluge of other messages.
> Don't assume that an unanswered message means you're being ignored. Given
> constructively, criticism will be taken better and have more positive
> effects, and you'll get the answers you want.
> John Maddock.
> Review Manager for Polynomial Library.
> Boost-users mailing list
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1988 - Release Date: 03/06/09
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk