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: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-03 10:05:31

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Edouard A. <edouard_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Are you guys saying that all algorithms in boost are currently proven?

I'm not aware of any that aren't... But I don't know all of the
libraries inside and out.

> If I were to submit an I/O library (it's an example, I'm not working on I/O)
> using somehow a "new" algorithm to manage asynchronous requests, would you
> ask me to use a more classical approach during the review?

If you don't have a solid mathematical proof for the correctness of
your algorithm, then I may instead ask for case studies, etc.

> What is the difference between a new algorithm and a new implementation of
> an old algorithm?

Are you trolling here?

> Does boost embrace innovation?

I think I have my answer.

> Innovations comes in many forms. It doesn't matter if the algorithm is new
> or not as long as the author is able to give a certain degree of assurance
> regarding reliability and correctness, isn't it?

I'm questioning the degree of assurance required for a new algorithm
to be unleashed on the unsuspecting masses.

Jon