Re: [boost] sorting library proposal (Was: Review Wizard Status Report for June 2009)o

Subject: Re: [boost] sorting library proposal (Was: Review Wizard Status Report for June 2009)o
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-03 01:42:35

2009/6/2 Steven Ross <spreadsort_at_[hidden]>:
>
> With regards to the question of whether Boost is interested in innovative
> algorithms, that's for the Boost community to decide; I don't know.
>

I think of Boost libraries under two basic (orthogonal) categories:

1) Innovative interfaces, where the implementation is an interesting
but ultimately not terribly important detail (except where the
implementation can itself be an interesting interface, like happened
with Spirit).

2) Solid, portable, C++-style implementations of common needs.

So I'd agree that C++ isn't the place for novel algorithms in general,
but I'd claim radix sorting is a common enough goal that a
nicely-tuned STL-style implementation would be appropriate for boost.