Subject: Re: [boost] [review] The review of Boost.DoubleEnded starts today: September 21 - September 30
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-07 22:49:10
On 09/27/2017 12:03 AM, degski via Boost wrote:
> On 27 September 2017 at 00:43, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> ... but libraries, in my opinion, should start with a minimal and
>> well grounded design and add more stuff as demand proves their need.
> This sounds good in theory, but doesn't work like that in practice.
> Libraries tend to get "stuck" in their inital state.
> As an example of this: I recently proposed to add variadic move
> construction for nodes to boost::pool (a trivial change). And even though
> this has obvious advantages (and would get rid for C++11 capable compilers
> of the use of M4 to generate the necessary code), this was received with:
> file a PR, including tests (?) and change to documentation. Enough to put
> me off, so I just changed it locally.
That sounds pretty normal to me. Documentation
and tests are the basic requirements for any change.
(Naturally, if the interface doesn't change, the
documentation shouldn't need to be updated.)