Subject: Re: [boost] [sort] Timsort review reminder
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-07 05:50:04
On 6/6/17 9:41 PM, degski via Boost wrote:
> On 6 June 2017 at 22:09, Klaim - JoÃ«l Lamotte via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I agree, a summary of what the hell is TimSort would be useful for
>> potential reviewers.
> It seems docs are missing from this implementation, but it *is* possible to
> find out what the hell TimSort is.
Wait a minute !
Is being suggested that a library without documentation is going to be
reviewed by Boost. If this is true, it is simply not possible.
Reviewing a library is a lot of effort and reviewers (or users) can't be
expected to decipher the how the library is to be used from through the
source. It should not be accepted for review in this condition.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk