Subject: Re: [boost] [review][Fit] Review of Fit starts today
From: Jason Rice (ricejasonf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-09-19 02:48:20
Please consider this review for the proposed Boost.Fit library.
I recommend the review manager ACCEPT this library for inclusion in Boost
# What is your evaluation of the design?
- Making high order functions easier and more concise is a good idea.
- I like the point-free programming features.
- Some of the names, conventions, and errors would take
any kind of user some getting used to.
- A version of `alias_value` that works in a generic context where the
type might not be an alias would be more useful I think.
# What is your evaluation of the implementation?
- The code is consistent across implementations and the files are pretty
- Each function can be included independently which is nice.
- It appears that there is some effort towards making errors easier to
For instance, I called `fit::partial` with too many arguments and the
was "error: no member named 'fit_function_param_limit'"
- There is some readability issues due to compiler compatibility support
specific compiler error workarounds.
- I noticed `fit::decay` is not used in the tests at all. It gets
`example.h` but is never used.
# What is your evaluation of the documentation?
- I like that the documentation is easy to read in the comments of each
- Some of the wording in the descriptions weren't very helpful for me
but the "Semantics" section seemed to always get the point of the
# What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
- It seems parts of the library might not be that useful if you have
constexpr lambdas, but I believe there are still features that enable
concise coding even against latest C++17 features.
- I will probably use this library now that I am familiar with it.
# Did you try to use the library? With which compiler(s)? Did you have any
- I made a couple of my own examples.
- I used a fairly recent fork of clang trunk with c++1z.
- BOOST_FIT_RETURNS *crashed the compiler* when I was trying to construct
with some pack expansion. It looked like it crashed the parser.
# How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?
- I spent a couple of hours looking at the docs in the source and making
my own test
programs to see how it could be used.
# Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
- I've used Boost.Hana a lot with its "functional" features.
# Were the concerns from the March 2016 review of Fit addressed?
For what it's worth here is a link to some of my attempts to sample the
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk