Subject: Re: [boost] Another GGL review
From: Jose (jmalv04_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-17 13:46:01
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Jonathan Franklin
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Jose <jmalv04_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> In my opinion, a good r-tree implementation is necessary. I have no
>> experience with the above library but I've seen other code from this
>> author to be of high quality.
> For the purposes of my own review, I'm trying to decide whether I
> think the library should be accepted without a spatial index. Would
> anyone like to sway my opinion one way or the other?
I think an important point in a library is that it has a roadmap. GGL
plans to address this!
I think is key to have enough at the beginning so that the library is
useful but the library has to evolve. Having too much at the beginning
might also be bad because there is less focus on the generic stuff !
I thiink a spatial index should be in but its better the "release
early, release often, but with high quality"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk