Re: [boost] [Boost-announce] [metaparse] Review period starts May 25th and ends June 7th

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-announce] [metaparse] Review period starts May 25th and ends June 7th
From: Abel Sinkovics (abel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-02 15:17:07

Hi Edward,

Thank you for the review.

On 2015-06-02 20:05, Edward Diener wrote:
>
> The original metaparse library was represented as a library within 
> mpllibs in the old Boost directory structure. The documentation of 
> this library was entirely a tutorial of the library.
The tutorial is just a part of the documentation. See 
http://abel.web.elte.hu/mpllibs/metaparse

> But a tutorial by itself is inadequate as documentation to a Boost 
> library. Documentation needs a reference of all the classes, 
> functions, data, macros of the library whether it is a library of 
> meatfunctions or a library of run-time constructs. Furthermore some 
> explanation of how the different parts of the library are organized 
> and meant to be used within that organization is needed in 
> documentation is necessary for me to understand a software library. So 
> while I would rate the tutorial as excellent the documentation was 
> inadequate.
You can find the reference here: 
http://abel.web.elte.hu/mpllibs/metaparse/reference.html

I agree that a description of the overall design of the library could be 
added to the documentation.

The tutorial has been designed in a way to show the common patterns (by 
example) of how the library is expected to be used. (Tokenisation, 
sequence, repetition, operators with precedence, parens, errors, etc).

> Sometime during the review process the presentation of what was being 
> reviewed completely changed. A new version of the library was 
> presented using the current Boost directory structure, with a very 
> full documentation set and the link to the tutorial documentation in 
> the original version being reviewed was removed.
What was being reviewed remained the same. I have created a reformatted 
(namespace/macro renaming from mpllibs -> boost and removal of the parts 
not part of the review in the first place) version of the code based on 
the feedback of the reviewers.

Regards,
   Ábel