Subject: Re: [boost] [GSoC] Checks project - prototype hesitation
From: Alejandro Cabrera (cpp.cabrera_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-19 20:05:42
Thank you for the documentation. I've glanced through the PDF, taking into
account the scope and general design of the library.
I also have concerns with regards to the nbr_digits parameter. The example
has shown me a case where the user is encouraged to store all the numbers in
a single container without separation. It seems like a bad idea to store the
numbers in that fashion. Why wouldn't the user instead prefer to store the
numbers in, say:
I'm not certain whether the weights should be a compile-time parameter or
not. My recommendation here is to craft examples where the weights are
compile-time parameters (using boost::tuple, perhaps?) and where the weights
are run-time parameters and attempt to determine for yourself what might be
easier and safer for users to use.
Pierre Talbot wrote:
> Hello Alejandro,
> I'm sorry for being unclear.
> You can see the forward declarations (and the doxygen doc) here :
> The documentation is here (you would like to read the introduction) :
> The nbr_digits parameter is optional but it is in case that the
> iterators don't delimit only one number. I designed an example for
> this special case (In the "Modular sum algorithm - Example - Special
> case" section). My first idea was to support the check of a lot of
> numbers between two iterators. But you maybe think it's a little
> far-fetched ?
> Any suggestions and comments are appreciated.
> Thank you very much,
> Pierre Talbot.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-GSoC-Checks-project-prototype-hesitation-tp3672034p3679676.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk