Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] non-interface-related concerns
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-28 11:50:17
> Again, only half-way true. The _design_ of the whole library is changing
> under our noses (not just parts of the implementation) while we're supposed
> to make an educated decision whether this library is ready for Boost or not.
What has actually changed in the presented library?
1. outcome<T>/result<T> has been renamed to
2. A few extraneous member functions and types have been removed.
3. A few bug fixes not affecting the public API.
Other than those, nothing has changed from the presented library. I
agree all this discussion and noise makes it seem more has happened, but
most of that discussion is speculative. I have only agreed to the above
> Once upon a time a Boost review was supposed to refer to a single fixed
> source code version and not a moving target as it is for this library. The
> decision whether somebody would like to see a library accepted into Boost or
> not should not be based on wishful thinking (that the author will implement
> things eventually) or on unsubstantiated promises.
Most of the wishful thinking has come from reviewers wanting to redesign
the library according to their preferences.
There is no moving target here. What has been presented for review is
what will be accepted into Boost if acceptance is recommended.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk