Subject: Re: [boost] [locale] Formal review of Boost.Local library -- need reviews!
From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-15 04:41:05
On 14.04.2011, at 07:51, Chad Nelson wrote:
> The final day of the Boost.Locale formal review is scheduled to be
> Saturday, and though there has been a lot of discussion, so far only
> one complete review has been submitted. If you're planning to review
> it, please don't delay.
> Writing a review
> If you feel this is an interesting library, then please submit your
> review to the developer list (preferably), or to the review manager
> Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
I think basing the design on std::locale but replacing the broken facets is a very good design.
There seem to be quite a few things that are tightly bound to iostreams, which I find less ideal, but I might be mistaken about this.
> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?
Did not look. But basing it on ICU seems the right decision.
> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Next/prev links are a must, and the docs could benefit from a native speaker reading over them, but all in all I found them to be good in that they quickly introduce what the library can do and how to do it. There are some complaints, but all of them have been mentioned by previous reviewers.
> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very big. Localization in standard C++ is broken beyond usability.
> - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
Did not try.
> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?
I read the documentation.
> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
As a German native speaker, I have some experience with the basic problems of localization, like case conversion of ß. I also know some Japanese and know a bit about the bigger problems that occur with such a truly non-English language.
> And finally, every review should answer this question:
> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk