[boost] [review] Heaps

Subject: [boost] [review] Heaps
From: Andrew Sutton (asutton.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-31 10:05:57

All,

I'd like to announce the beginning of the review of the Heap library,
written by Tim Blechmann, and resulting from Tim's 2010 Google Summer
of Code project The library implements a number of different heaps (or
priority queues) including, a binary heap, d-ary heap, binomial heap,
fibonacci heap, pairing heap, and skew heap. The library also provides
an adaptor to make heaps mutable, allowing a programmer to modify a
value and update its position within the heap. The library also also
supports stability, ensuring that elements pushed into a heap with the
same priority are popped in the same order. The library is not
targeted in any specific domain nor directly related to any specific
libraries, but intended to be a collection of general purpose data
structures (not unlike the Boost.Unordered library).

The documentation and source code can be downloaded from here:

Documentation: http://tim.klingt.org/boost_heap
Code: http://tim.klingt.org/git?p=boost_heap.git;a=snapshot;h=HEAD;sf=tgz

Unlike previous reviews, this review will be assisted by a code review
application, Code Collaborator (by SmartBear). The product was tested
during a BoostCon session, and we are eager to see how well it scales
to a community review. You can use the link below to access and review
the Heap library.

http://demo.smartbear.com/boost/go?page=ReviewDisplay&reviewid=4

The application allows line-by-line comments of the submitted source
code in addition to providing features for general defect and issue
reporting. If you are interested in using this system, we will have to
register you as a user of the site. You can request access by replying
to this message. I'm still learning my way around the system, so there
are bound to be some missteps along the way :) If you are not
interested in using the system, then feel free to send email like any
other review.

Reviews of the library should address the following questions.

    What is your evaluation of the design?
    What is your evaluation of the implementation?
    What is your evaluation of the documentation?
    What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
    Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have
any problems?
    How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A
quick reading? In-depth study?
    Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

And finally, every review should answer this question:

    Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be
sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure
your overall opinion.

Please note that some questions may be easier to answer in email than
with the review tool.

As always, reviews are important to the continued quality of the Boost
C++ Libraries. Thank you in advance for your comments and
contributions.

Andrew

PS. The review was slated to start on Sunday, but I was not able to
make the announcement until today.