Subject: Re: [boost] [TypeIndex] Peer review period for library acceptance begins, ending Thurs 21st Nov
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-18 07:16:51
On Nov 12, 2013, at 2:34 PM, "Niall Douglas" <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 1. Should this library be accepted into Boost?
No, not in its present state.
> 2. Any conditions which should be attached to acceptance into Boost e.g. fixes, additional testing, changes to documentation. Please be as specific as possible here (bullet points are good!)
I'm totally confused as to what library would be added to Boost, if it were even conditionally accepted. There have been myriad suggestions and ideas for altering the submitted library, it isn't worth my time to study the submission now. Names will change. Return types will change. Derivations will change. Performance characteristics will change.
I would prefer that the library be updated, to address the issues raised, and then be submitted for another formal review.
> What is Boost.TypeIndex?
> TypeIndex performs three main functions:
> 1. It provides a consistent, well defined, portable boost::typeid()
> implementation with a consistent, well defined, portable boost::type_info class implementation which mirrors std::type_info.
That's a worthwhile purpose.
> Implementation-specific weirdnesses (e.g. std::type_info::raw_name(),
> the fact the hash_code is often terrible and collides frequently) are abstracted out into a single, portable API.
> 2. It provides the ability to convert a type into a uniquely
> identifiable, container indexable, boost::type_info instance (e.g.
> &typeid(T) or C++11 class std::type_index) with RTTI disabled, thereby removing the need for requiring RTTI enabled for many type_info use cases.
Those are useful capabilities.
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk