Verdict: I would like to see a better multidimensional array library in Boost. I would even like to see *this* multidimensional array library in boost, if it were properly documented with some of the rough edges filed off. But I can barely see an improvement on the state of the documentation since the last review. I feel like I spent more time and effort on this review than the submitter did on the documentation. I also feel that I have barely scratched the surface in this review. I didn't even notice that major components (layout_t and extents_t) were missing from the documentation until halfway through.
I don't want to outright reject a library that is already conditionally accepted, especially a library that meets a need I have, but I don't think the library substantially closer to ready for inclusion in Boost than the last time I saw it. I therefore vote to CONDITIONALLY ACCEPT the library, on the condition that every single one of my complaints is addressed, followed by another review.
-- Rainer Deyke - rainerd@eldwood.com
Thank you Rainer for your extensive review. I have converted all of your points into a long task list (98 items) on a Github issue. I also asked Alfredo to speak with Jean-Louis Leroy about the API reference missing many items. Jean-Louis also has uses the Mr. Docs autogenerated API reference on Boost.OpenMethod, but the OpenMethod implementation is clearly more inline with what is needed: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/libs/openmethod/doc/html/openmethod/re... Matt