Subject: Re: [boost] FW: FW: Proposal for a Differential Evolution C++library
From: Graham, Jeff (Jeff.Graham_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-10 12:54:27
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Adrian Michel
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:04 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] FW: FW: Proposal for a Differential Evolution
> On 1/9/2012 9:11 AM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> > I, for one, think this looks a very useful library.
I am interested in the library. I have used lilGP and several others.
> > But few of the Boosters who follow these lists will be expert or
> > potential users of this
> > 'niche' topic - which is why I think you've not had a deservedly
> > response ;-)
> Thanks. I'm actually not surprised by the limited response for the
> reasons you mention, but I imagine this must have been the case with
> other libraries as well.
> > The documentation looks in a good state. The code looks clean and
> > but finding someone to
> > run on a non-MSVC platforms would be useful - Boost likes to be
*seen* to be
> > portable.
I can help test on i686, amd64 and arm9 running linux.
> I thought that was going to be a requirement in a later stage, after
> library was accepted. Nevertheless, if somebody on this list is
> to test the library on a non MS platform and using a compiler
> from Visual Studio, I will appreciated your help!
> > The folder structure should be 'Boost standard' so that it is
> > use bjam to build and use
> > Boost.Test. (Do not hesitate to ask for help - bjam is the Outer
> > of computer languages
> > and using it is a dark art!)
> I'll look into it and make the necessary changes.
> > You will first need to find a review manager (preferably a Boost
> > contributor), and it will be
> > necessary to have some reviewers too! (Reviewers need not
> > currently active Boost
> > followers for a specialist library like this - expertise is the key
> > So you may need to find and drum up support from some potential (or
> > still, actual) users ?
> The library was reviewed from a functional and conceptual standpoint
> the creators of the DE algorithm and they seem to have validated it,
> maybe less so from a C++ standpoint though. I also received very
> feedback for further enhancements that I'll be adding in a future
> As far as a boost review manager and other reviewers, I can only count
> on list members that are willing to volunteer some of their time for
> this purpose (please let me know if interested). I'll also try to
> some support outside of the list.
> One of the nice things about DE is that it is relatively simple and
> generic, and it doesn't require any advanced or domain specific
> knowledge, so I'm sure anybody on this list could learn enough about
> to be able to review the library, without spending too much time and
> Adrian Michel
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk