Re: [boost] [Hana] Formal review for Hana

Subject: Re: [boost] [Hana] Formal review for Hana
From: Louis Dionne (ldionne.2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-22 15:11:27

Kohei Takahashi <flast <at> flast.jp> writes:

> > [...]
> > The main interest was that it results in very clear error messages. For
> > example,
> > [...]
> Ah, yes, It is clearer and better, but I think that those symbol names
> are too generic.
> So, how about using other namespace like `::boost_hana::tuple` (it seems
> redundant, though)? e.g. Boost.MPL uses `::mpl_` to implement some
> details.

We could use `::hana_`, or simply use `boost::hana::fold_left_t`. I'll think
of something.

> > The compiler requirements are currently documented in the README, which
> > is the first thing that pops up when you go to the project page on
> GitHub.
> You mean [1]? If so, it is not enough what I want.
> I want something like followings,
> 
> -- Hana requires generic lambda, variable templates and ... but not
> generalized lambda caputure, ... (and so on).
> [...]

I understand what you want. I added more specific requirements.

> > [...]
> > However, there is quite a bit of imprecision in the documentation
> regarding
> > which functions should return a reference and which ones should return 
> > copies, so right now it is unclear when the above is actually valid. 
> > That will be addressed by this issue [3].
> OK, I understand.
> If the issue affects Hana's design (such as purely, which algorithm can
> (or not) take a reference and/or can modify within iterating), open a
> mini-review might be better.

No, the issue is not Hana's design, but rather the current implementation.

[snip]

Regards,
Louis

--
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Hana-Formal-review-for-Hana-tp4676969p4677452.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.