Re: Pretty printer module

From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-10-09 08:08:15

On 08/10/2024 21:12, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 12:59 PM René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Given how this tool generates code that is directly part of Boost
>> libraries I think a review would help in getting approval that it does
>> things in a way that authors will accept.
>>
> Neither approval nor acceptance from "authors" is necessary. Authors
> express their dislike of pretty_printers by not using the tool. Library
> authors have traditionally been free to style their code however they like.
> Robert for example is free to use C++98isms in his Serialization library,
> and I will defend the right to do so to the death (his not mine). As long
> as there is even one author who wishes to use pretty_printers in their
> already-accepted library, then the tool should be added to the Boost
> Project without any need for a formal review.
>
> As far as I can tell, most if not all of the tools in Boost were added
> without a formal review.

I put auto_Index through review - I believe it helped to make it more 
usable.

However, the standard for acceptance, and level of review may well be 
different given that this is not user-facing code.

Just my 2c, John.