Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review][mp11] Formal review of Mp11
From: Peter Koch Larsen (peter.koch.larsen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-23 06:02:35

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> peterkochlarsen wriote:
>> > 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
>> brigand.
> Thanks.
>> > 3. What is your evaluation of the implementation?
>> It is solid. I would like to see some improvement in the sort algorithm,
>> however.
> What specifically? It holds its own pretty well on, on Clang 4 it
> loses only to kvasir (but then again, who doesn't lose to kvasir?)

Sorry about the noise. As part of my review I went through the
benchmarks at I saw that sort performed badly for mp11,
but revisiting the site I realise that I misread the graph.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at