Subject: Re: [boost] [review] Review of Outcome (ends Sun-28-May)
From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-26 09:17:44
2017-05-26 8:34 GMT+02:00 Thomas Heller via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>:
> On 05/26/2017 12:43 AM, charleyb123 . via Boost wrote:
>> *- Thomas Heller -- (almost a review), ?reject, "not-ready-yet?"
> Please don't count my comments as a review. I don't feel qualified right
> now to make any statements on the quality of the library presented. There
> is too much in flux of it right now and after all discussions, it is not
> clear to me what the current state of the library really is and how much it
> will change after the review.
You are making a valid point. Typically, the outcome of a boost review is
etiher "accept" or "acceppt, but fix this and that", or "reject". Now,
during this review, my feeling is we are just trying to design big parts of
the library. There is so many open questions, that one cannot get te sense
of the final shape. To reject it would be sending the wrong message that we
do not wat the problem to be solved, or that the solution is wrong. But it
is not wrong: it is just "I can make it whatever you want". To accept it on
condition that it has a different interface, is like accepting something
else than what we see. We can do it technically, but it feels wrong. I am
confused here, I admit.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk