Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-24 15:43:46
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti_at_[hidden]>
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Dean Michael Berris
> > <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> I (and maybe others as well who follow the same logic I follow) don't
> >> see a large enough gap between C++11 lambdas and
> >> Boost.Phoenix/Lambda/Bind function objects that merits being addressed
> >> by local functions. Until you can convince us that local functions are
> >> "absolutely necessary" and that C++ should have it because it makes
> >> certain programming paradigms/techniques possible, I'm afraid what you
> >> have is a solution that's looking for a problem.
> > 1) I don't think I have to convince anyone. Following Boost process, I
> > have first asked for interest in the library about ~1year ago plus all
> > the reviewers have answered the question:
> >> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
> > With that information I am confident that the review manager will be
> > able to assess the library usefulness taking into consideration the
> > opinion of /all/ the people that reviewed the library.
> Actually, you kinda have to convince people -- especially now that
> questions have been raised by members of the community, both in the
> review and on this thread. There have been "non-inclusion" votes
> already sent in. I'll throw my hat into that side of the ring too now
> if it's not too late and too much work to write a review.
More than anything, I just want to let everyone know that I'm closely
following this thread (and related threads) to help me make a decision on
Local. I was hoping this discussion would also clarify the position Boost
takes on similar libraries. However, clearly, whatever decision I make is
going to be quite polarizing, and, honestly, I don't think it's a decision
*I* should make; the community appears to be having difficulty coming to
anything resembling a consensus :/
Personally, going into this review, I thought Local was a shoe-in for
acceptance. But I feel like those against inclusion have brought up some
very good points.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk