Re: [boost] Boost.Local Review (Nov 10, 2011 to Nov 19, 2011) by Krzysztof Czaiński

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Local Review (Nov 10, 2011 to Nov 19, 2011) by Krzysztof Czaiński
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-14 15:33:53

Firstly, thanks, Krzysztof for your review of the documentation and design!

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Krzysztof Czainski <1czajnik_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> About me: I write C++ apps and RTS, mostly for embedded devices. I often
> use complicated C++ structures, and of course boost. Boost.Local caught my
> interest, so I decided to review it.
>
> I intend to try to use this library on MinGW-4.5, and on a Texas
> Instruments/DSP compiler, however I can't do that this week, so I won't
> make it until the end of this review.
>
[...]

If this is something you would be able to do by the end of *next* week, I
would have no trouble formally or informally extending the review to give
you a chance to try out the library on a real project.  I think such
experience would prove valuable.

> - Lorenzo is proposing to add boost::local::function::overload to
> > Boost.Function as boost::function::overload.  See
> >
> >
> https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/local/libs/local/doc/html/boost/local/function/overload.html
>
>
> I don't remember missing such a utility in my experience, but it seems
> reasonable to add it to boost function. However, I don't understand, how
> can it be added as boost::function::overload, when boost::function is a
> class template?
>

Ack, of course.  The question really is: Is
boost::local::function::overload of sufficient general interest to give it
a more natural home?

> > - Lorenzo is proposing to add BOOST_IDENTITY_TYPE to boost/utility.  See
> >
> >
> https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/local/libs/local/doc/html/BOOST_IDENTITY_TYPE.html
> > - Likewise, Lorenzo is proposing to add BOOST_IDENTITY_VALUE to
> > boost/utility.  See
> >
> >
> https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/local/libs/local/doc/html/BOOST_IDENTITY_VALUE.html
> >
>
> I don't remember missing any of the above in my experience. One of "more
> readable alternatives" described in the docs have sufficed.
>

Noted.

> Thanks in advance to all who participate in the review discussion; I'm
> > looking forward to it!
> >
> > - Jeffrey Hellrung (Review Manager)
> > - Gregory Crosswhite (Review Assistant)
>
>
> This was my first review, and I hope it's useful ;-)
>

Indeed, and thanks again!

- Jeff