Re: [boost] [review] [sort] Sort library review manager results

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] [sort] Sort library review manager results
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-29 06:31:39

On November 28, 2014 9:32:22 PM EST, Steven Ross <spreadsort_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I think we want to keep it a separate library from algorithms for
>> >compatibility with modular boost.  boost/libs/spreadsort is fine
>> > with me.
>>
>> On what do you base that conclusion?
>>
>
>Based on the fact that I know how to build the library and copy it into
>the
>boost tree in the modular boost fashion, but don't know how to do the
>same from inside the algorithms directory.
>
>> >An alternative structure would be to have a
>boost/libs/sort/spreadsort
>> >structure, but in that case I'd be maintaining future sort
>> >contributions in
>> >addition to spreadsort to keep it one coherent library (which I'm
>> >willing to do).
>>
>> Thanks for offering to do that. However, I fail to understand how you
>> think multiple sub-libraries under boost/libs/sort will be more
>tenable
>> than the same under boost/libs/algorithm/sort.
>
>There is a lot of code under algorithm.  Synchronizing a few sort
>algorithms into a release version seems simpler than synchronizing all
>of algorithm.  Please correct me and explain how it's done if I'm wrong.

Marshall Clow is the maintainer of Boost.Algorithm, so the latter would actually be his job. :)

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)