Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc 2013] chrono::date
From: Anurag Kalia (anurag.kalia_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-27 05:08:21
> > But I had an epiphany just now. Digging through boost docs, I saw in 'Appendices' > 'Future Notes' that they intend to release chrono::date on the basis of a proposal written by you! First of all, wow. Second of all, how concrete are those plans? They are included in boost docs themselves so I have doubts now if there is any room to modify the public interface.
> All this is ongoing work. Nothing is fixed and nothing is delivered on
> And yes I would like to have Chrono/Date library in Boost, either based
> on my current interface, the one of Howard or yours if you reaches to
> get to finish a whole implementation with better interface. So no, the
> interface is not closed, but any proposal you could do would need to
> show it is a better interface.
Ok. I have uploaded the proposal anyway for review so you can see the inconsistencies. Yet, I would be scrutinising the two aforementioned proposals more closely for the next draft.
> As always it is up to you to make your proposal. You had the entry
> points up to you to make a convincing proposal. Propose an interface,
> compare it with the existing ones, argument why do you go this way, ...
That is a relief. Because I do happen to (humbly) disagree with some design choices.
> Once thing is clear I would not mentor a project if I'm not confident
> with the competences of the student on the domain, know the problems and
> some solutions and has a clear vision of how the final library could
> look like. Of course during the project, things can and always will
> change, but we need a direction, a goal.
May the best man win! May the boost win! :o)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk