Subject: Re: [boost] [review][mp11] Formal review of Mp11
From: peterkochlarsen (peter.koch.larsen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-22 18:30:50
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
> The formal review of Peter Dimov's Mp11 library is scheduled for
> July 15 - July 24, 2017 .
> 1. Should Mp11 be accepted into Boost? Please state all conditions
> for acceptance explicity.
Yes. Especially so if mp11 can be merged with the ideas from kvasir and
> 2. What is your evaluation of the design?
I like the design, it is elegant and easy to understand.
> 3. What is your evaluation of the implementation?
It is solid. I would like to see some improvement in the sort algorithm,
> 4. What is your evaluation of the documentation?
The documentation is well-written. Easy to read, making it easy to find the
stuff you need.
> 5. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
It would be very useful to me. I currently use the brigand library and find
that library also very good. But if mp11 is acepted into boost, I will
> 6. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have
> any problems?
No, due to time pressure, I did not have time to use the library.
> 7. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?
A quick reading this time. I have been following Peter Dimovs work for some
years though, beginning with his introduction to template metaprogramming
which was an eye-opener to me.
> 8. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
I am somewhat knowledgeable as I have implemented a template-library (much
more limited in scope) and thus have lots of knowledge about how not to do
template meta programming. ;-)
I am also a user of brigand, and use it a lot - as my current project is
(ab)using templates all over the place.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/review-mp11-Formal-review-of-Mp11-tp4696839p4697275.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.