Subject: Re: [boost] Feature suggestions for Boost's program_options
From: Klemens Morgenstern (klemens.morgenstern_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-08-07 13:48:16
Am 07.08.2016 um 18:58 schrieb Eyal Rozenberg:
> - What do you think about these suggestions, in principle?
Sound useful, and quite clear.
> - If you find some of them relevant, can you help estimate the
> necessary development effort and possible negative
> implications/caveats to consider?
Have you looked at the code and checked that? Boost is an open source
community, so the easiest way would probably be to just write it yourself.
> - Assuming a feature idea is both relevant and feasible, is it
> customary to request implementation by the maintainer? Commit yourself
> to implementing it vis-a-vis statement of statement of partiality to
> accepting a patch? Some other practice?
I think not. You can just fork the library on github, implement the
features and create a pull request there. Though unlike my first PRs,
they need to be clean, i.e. one feature per PR. If you do that, i.e.
implement the feature, write a test and add documentation, there's not
much reason for the maintainer to not accept that. You can of course
flag the PR as WIP, so that you show what you want to do and discuss it
before wirting all the tests etc.
And of course once you started you'll probably get more help than with a
feature request. Please keep in mind, that most of the maintainers are
really busy, so while they'd probably be glad to help you, they can't
spend the time to add whole new features.
> Thank you for getting through the long(ish) email and for your hard work,
> Eyal Rozenberg
> DB architecture group
> CWI Amsterdam
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk