Subject: Re: [boost] [sort] Timsort review reminder
From: Zach Laine (whatwasthataddress_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-07 14:29:35
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 5:54 AM, Steven Ross via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]
> I would prefer a mini-review myself (as I agreed to do when adding new
> algorithms to the collection).but Ronald suggested I do a full review. My
> main questions are: Does anyone care about Timsort?
> Will Alexander maintain the source and answer questions about it?
> If you don't care about Timsort, you don't need to review it.
I don't know if I care about TimSort (though I'd really *like* to know
that). That's exactly the sort of question documentation is meant to
answer. It needs to be ready before the review, so that reviewers can even
do the review. It also needs to exist so that after the review, users can
determine if the code will be useful to them, without having to create or
run benchmarks, or read source code.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk