Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Endian mini-review

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Endian mini-review
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-18 07:36:29

On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Rob Stewart <rob.stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> enum class align is overkill. I'd prefer an ordinary enum:
>
> enum assignment
> {
>    aligned,
>    unaligned
> };
>
> Usage, in endian_buffer for example, would be a little more straightforward:
>
> template
> <
>    order Order
>    , typename T
>    , std::size_t Nbits
>    , alignment Align = unaligned
>> class endian_buffer;
>

I have a mild preference for the current scoped enum formulation, so
am not making the change. I do agree that for libraries that support
C++03 compilers, a scoped enum is awkward.

> More doc comments....

> index.html
>
> 9 editorial fixes.

Applied, more or less as suggested.

>
> buffer.html
>
> s/See the Wikipedia/See Wikipedia/ reads better to me

I tried it, but "the Wikipedia" reads better to me.

> 12 editorial fixes.

Applied, more or less as suggested.

I've push the changes up to github, and also updated
https://boostorg.github.io/endian/

Thanks,

--Beman