Re: [review] boost.bloom

From: Joaquin M López Muñoz (joaquinlopezmunoz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2025-05-18 16:06:34

El 18/05/2025 a las 12:44, Claudio DeSouza via Boost escribió:
> Hello there,
>
> I have spent some time playing around with boost.bloom and my review is
> ACCEPT.

Hi Claudio, thanks for your review!

> The library is very well written, provides intuitive interfaces that are
> already common in C++ and familiar to users, and the SIMD optimisations are
> very impressive.
>
> Documentation is exemplary, although I would suggest adding a short summary
> of how this is not a container despite the similarities in interface but
> how in practice it differs from a set, so the short of attention can better
> catch the gist of it.

Good idea, noted.

> I feel the source code could have been better documented for future
> maintainers, but that’s of no importance overall.
>
> I looked into other implementations for bloom filters, and this boost
> implementation could be described as “very fancy”, however the user
> experience has no unnecessary clutter and is friendly enough to the
> non-expert. I particularly must admit I felt out of depth opining in the
> implementation in general beyond recognising this candidate stands out in
> its quality by comparison with other implementations.
>
> Bloom looks exactly like the sort of thing boost is known to provide model
> implementation for, and it seems to be a perfect candidate to boost. A sort
> of “going back to its roots” IMO.

Let me take the opportunity to also thank Peter Dimov and Chris
Mazakas, who reviewed some chunks of code and the entire documentation
during development. Any remaining problems with the library are of
course my fault alone.

Joaquin M Lopez Munoz