Subject: Re: [boost] [review] Convert library
From: Vladimir Batov (Vladimir.Batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-25 22:02:03
On 05/26/2014 11:32 AM, Vladimir Batov wrote:
> I did. I do not believe it covers all deployment scenarios. I can be
> wrong though. That said, I have to qualms stepping back and letting
> Jeroen to bring "coerce" back to life. I'll take someone else's work
> any time (with commercial-development-specifics caveats). Less work
> and hassle for me. Honestly, it'll be a relief. I am already exhausted
> just going through this 2 weeks review.
Meant to say "I have NO qualms stepping back". In fact, I am beginning
to think that I might have to retreat defeated (no drama). It is
because, if my memory serves me, the majority of reviews had
"conditional yes" votes which seems good on the surface of it. The
complication (as I see it) though is that those conditions were along
the lines "I vote yes if you change the interface to what I like"...
which renders "no" for the interface under consideration.
I am happy to keep going (if decided so) but, truth be told, only a
couple of reviews were in support of proposed interface and the rest
were essentially "no"s due to "un-meet-able" :-) conditions... unless we
can sum-up all the interface-related input into some concrete function
signature... which I am happy to implement.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk