Re: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?

Subject: Re: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-05 08:05:31

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Roshan Naik
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:12 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] [castor] Interest in Logic Paradigm for C++ ?
> 
> Based on suggestions from some Boost community experts, I would like to
> gauge interest to see if there is broader interest for including the Castor
> library into Boost. In short, Castor's aim is to foster multiparadigm
> programming in C++ by supporting techniques from the Logic Paradigm. See
> below for a longer description.

> Castor is intended to be a free standing library that depends only on the
> standard C++ library. It does not depend on Boost or other libraries. It is
> a pure header library.

> A stable 1.0 version has been available since 2008 on
> www.mpprogramming.com/cpp under the MIT license. Work on version 1.1 is in
> progress and an early beta is now available. Current efforts are directed
> largely towards making Castor a richer "standard library" for working with
> LP in C++.
> 
> Castor was not originally targeted for Boost but more recently I have been
> giving it more serious consideration regarding inclusion into Boost. At the
> upcoming BoostCon 2010 I will be presenting 'Logic Paradigm for C++'. If
> there is interest, my thought is that feedback from the Boost
> review/submission process and modifications to satisfy other Boost
> requirements/guidelines will perhaps yield a 1.2 version that will become
> the real Boost candidate. Any help in this space will be much appreciated.

This will be of interest to some - but don't be deterred if the initial response is underwhelming - this is 'niche
market' stuff ;-)

Many (most?) potential users will not read this group - though you have got a good response from those that do..

I'm fairly ignorant of the 'pro-logicians domain' but it looks in pretty good shape.

But a few things I noticed that Boosters generally like for a Boost library are:

* use Boost.Test - this is very desirable for the portable testing regime.

* included files are .hpp (or .ipp) and

* structure of files isn't Boost style (bizarre as it may seem).

* ALL files need a licence and copyright.

* Quickbook toolchain is preferred documentation method - but you have obviously got a good system going already. pdf
are fine but doc not so popular - and not everyone can convert doc to pdf.

* Some find Doxygen docs useful for reference -  both standalone and as reference section within Quickbook.  This ensure
that code and docs keep in sync (and save you from (re-)editing the .doc files!).  Doxygen reference may be especially
useful where the functions of the functions are not as guessable as is common.

* the tests provide quite a lot of examples, but a formal libs/example folder with several annotated examples is popular
(and is very useful to get people started - as well as the nice tutorial). (Using Quickbook allows you to pick out
snippets from header and example files).

* using bjam is recommended (though a pig to get going).

All these are quite easily fixable (though changing the tests will need some key-bashing).

Good luck (and ask here for further help).

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, UK   LA8 8AB
[phone], mobile [phone]
pbristow_at_[hidden]