Subject: Re: [boost] [review] [poly_collection] Reminder: Review of PolyCollection started May 3rd
From: Ion GaztaÃ±aga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-05 20:10:06
I know a lot of boosters are willing to write a review of this great
library, so please don't be shy!
On 03/05/2017 1:46, Ion GaztaÃ±aga via Boost wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> The formal review of JoaquÃn M. LÃ³pez MuÃ±oz's PolyCollection library
> starts today.
> I'd like to encourage your participation as the proposed library is
> small and focused, and reviewers don't need to be domain experts to
> appreciate the potential usefulness of the library and propose
> PolyCollection implements fast containers of polymorphic objects.
> Typically, polymorphic objects cannot be stored directly in regular
> containers and need be accessed through an indirection pointer, which
> introduces performance problems related to CPU caching and branch
> prediction. Boost.PolyCollection implements a novel data structure that
> is able to contiguously store polymorphic objects without such
> indirection, thus providing a value-semantics user interface and better
> performance. Three polymorphic collections are provided:
> * boost::base_collection
> * boost::function_collection
> * boost::any_collection
> dealing respectively with classic base/derived or OOP polymorphism,
> function wrapping in the spirit of std::function and so-called duck
> typing as implemented by Boost.TypeErasure.
> The library can be found here:
> and the documentation here:
> Please post your comments and review to the boost mailing list
> (preferably), the Boost Library Incubator. or privately to the Review
> Manager (to me ;-). Here are some questions you might want to answer in
> your review:
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?
> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
> - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?
> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
> And most importantly:
> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
> For more information about Boost Formal Review Process, see:
> Waiting your reviews!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk