Re: [boost] [review] Review of PolyCollection starts today (May 3rd)

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] Review of PolyCollection starts today (May 3rd)
From: Joaquin M López Muñoz (joaquinlopezmunoz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-17 18:12:05

El 17/05/2017 a las 17:12, Brook Milligan via Boost escribió:
> [...]
>
>> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
> The documentation seemed amazingly clear, even though I am not a game developer and do not relate daily to warriors and goblins. [...]

Neither do I. I suspect real game developers will smile at the naïveté 
of the example,
though.

> [...]
> - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
> I did use the library.  In particular, I compiled all of the examples and built a small program with a class hierarchy of my own to test my understanding of the base_collection container.  This was done with Apple LLVM version 8.0.0 (clang-800.0.42.1).  The only problem was that the following test cases needed -std=c++14 (rather than c++11) because std::make_unique is not defined for c++11 on that compiler: algorithms, basic_function, and segmented_structure.

Thanks for noticing this, will fix in the corresponding Jamvile.v2. By 
the way, algorithms.cpp
need C++14 not because of make_unique (which is not used there) but for 
generic lambdas
such as:

https://github.com/joaquintides/poly_collection/blob/master/example/algorithms.cpp#L152-L155

FWIW, algorithms is already marked as needing C++14:

https://github.com/joaquintides/poly_collection/blob/master/example/Jamfile.v2#L15-L19

so I guess you didn't use b2 for building for went directly with the 
compiler command line,
right?

> [...]
>
>> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
> Yes, I feel this would be a very useful addition to Boost and would likely use it in my code.

Thank you!

Joaquín M López Muñoz