Re: [bloom] Andrzej's feedback

From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2025-05-22 12:06:48

niedz., 18 maj 2025 o 13:29 Andrzej Krzemienski <akrzemi1_at_[hidden]>
napisał(a):

> Hi Everyone,
> The following can hardly be called a library review, but I still wanted to
> give this feedback.
>

I recommend to ACCEPT Boost.Bloom to Boost.

I have provided some more detailed feedback earlier.
I find the documentation exemplary, design sound and adequate, use case
real and worth addressing.
I have played with toy examples. They compiled without problems (gcc 13.2
in C++11 and C++20).
I have not looked at the implementation. I let the review manager judge how
this should affect the weight of the review.
I am not knowledgeable in the problem domain.
The time I have spent on studying the library: if I summed up all the
hours, that would be like 20h

A note about exception safety. Using the definitions from David Abrahams,
"basic exception safety" should be provided for every function. I cannot
see any note about the exception safety of this library. Usually when I
find a new library on the web, I assume that the author is not aware of the
problems of "exception safety", and I do not trust them until I am
convinced otherwise. I am pretty sure Boost.Bloom takes this into account,
but I could not find anything in the docs on this matter.

Additionally, for the copy assignment of the class filter: the docs do not
say what happens when the allocator throws. Note that allocators may throw
even if we have not run out of memory: do you provide the strong ("commit
or rollback") guarantee? Or just the basic one? The same for reset().

Regards,
&rzej;