Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [metaparse] Review period starts May 25th and ends June 7th - ongoing
From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-01 07:57:31

2015-05-28 15:12 GMT+02:00 Christophe Henry <christophe.j.henry_at_[hidden]>:

> Dear all,
> The review of the metaparse library started last Monday.
> Please consider taking the time to review it and post comments or reviews
> on this list.

This is not a review. Just a remark.
All reviews I attended so far had the following structure:
The author presented the library in the shape that he considered ready to
be pushed to Boost repository and shipped. The reviewers decided if they
wanted the library in the given shape.

This time, the situation looks different. It looks like the contract is,
"if you the library is accepted, it will be changed to the following...",
and to me it is not clear enough what I am reviewing: the library in the
current shape, or the promise of something else.

I believe that the library with such capabilities deserves its place in
Boost. Even macro MPLLIBS_STRING() alone is a useful (and impressive)
addition. But as it is, it does not even meet Boost naming conventions,
(should probably be BOOST_MPL_STRING()).

It took me a long while to figure out what the library does. I have seen
examples of compile-time regexp and safe printf, but as it turns out, this
is not what the proposed library is.

I understand that the author is reluctant to invest time in Boostifying the
library unless he knows that the library is accepted. For encouragement, I
can say I would vote for inclusion, if what was proposed, were a Boostified
library in the shape that is intended to go into Boost repository.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at