Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] non-interface-related concerns
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-28 13:53:51
> I'd like to repeat my suggestion for the review manager to consider
> rescheduling this review without an acceptance decision now.
Usual fear, uncertainty and doubt from this individual. He is a
consistently negative person - anything I ever propose he always
agitates the same way, and I hope people will ignore his trolling.
I will restate that apart from removal of a few member functions and
types, and renaming outcome<T> and result<T>, the presented library is
not going to change much because I have not been persuaded of any
defects in it.
I have been persuaded to add non-empty-capable varieties, and narrow
observer varieties. But they're all typedefs of the same implementation,
just as is currently the case in the presented library where there is a
single implementation typedefed into varieties.
The only major change in implementation I've agreed to is replacement of
preprocessor-based stamping out of varieties with a template-based
implementation which does exactly the same thing.
Such limited changes are hardly cause to reschedule a review, but I'll
leave that to the review manager to decide.
-- 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