[boost] [review][mp11] Reminder of ongoing formal review

Subject: [boost] [review][mp11] Reminder of ongoing formal review
From: Bjorn Reese (breese_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-21 15:36:11

The formal review of Mp11 continues until (and including) Monday, July
24th.

There have been four formal reviews so far.

I would like to ask the Boost community for two favours:

   1. Please postpone the discussions about CMake and the future
      directions of Boost until the formal review has ended.

   2. Please review the Mp11 library instead.

If you disagree with any of the above, please contact me off-list.

Here is the call for review once more:

The formal review of Peter Dimov's Mp11 library is scheduled for
July 15 - July 24, 2017 [1].

Mp11 is a C++11 metaprogramming library for compile-time manipulation of
data structures that contain types. It’s based on template aliases and
variadic templates and implements the approach outlined in the article
"Simple C++ metaprogramming" [2] and its sequel [3]. These articles are
useful background information for the review.

   * Mp11 aims to make simple usage simple, and to support complex usage
     without complicating the simple use cases.

   * Mp11 works on any type-list, whether its own type-list mp_list,
     or standard type-lists such as std::tuple and std::variant, or
     user-defined type-lists.

   * Mp11 works with any meta-function, such as C++11 or Boost
     type-traits, or user-defined type-traits.

Mp11 can be found here:

   * Documentation: https://rawgit.com/pdimov/mp11/master/doc/html/mp11.html

   * Source code: https://github.com/pdimov/mp11/tree/master

Please answer the following questions in your review [4]:

  1. Should Mp11 be accepted into Boost? Please state all conditions
     for acceptance explicity.

  2. What is your evaluation of the design?

  3. What is your evaluation of the implementation?

  4. What is your evaluation of the documentation?

  5. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

  6. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have
     any problems?

  7. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
     reading? In-depth study?

  8. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

[1] http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html
[2] http://pdimov.com/cpp2/simple_cxx11_metaprogramming.html
[3] http://pdimov.com/cpp2/simple_cxx11_metaprogramming_2.html
[4] http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html