Re: [Boost-users] [review] Formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library begins today

From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-28 12:00:58

Joaquin,

thanks for your feedback.

Joaquin M Lopez Munoz wrote:
> John Torjo <john.groups <at> torjo.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today starts the formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory 
> library.
> [...]
> 
> Hello, this is not a review, but only a compilation of
> some doubts and suggestions for improvement:
> 
> 1. I think value_factory requires that T be copyable, even if
> copying is ellided through RVO. This requirement is not stated
> in the docs.

Yes.

> 2. Maybe it's a good idea to have BOOST_UTILITY_VALUE_FACTORY_MAX_ARITY
> be automatically greater than or equal to
> BOOST_FUNCTIONAL_FORWARD_ADAPTER_MAX_ARITY, so as to make it
> simpler to forward adapt value_factory. Same for plain factory.

I'm not sure I like to couple these components. It's not /that/ likely
to forward adapt factories, after all:

I suspect that the arguments will be most commonly fed either by a) a
central facility that might as well use lvalues or b) Boost.Function (no
rvalue-ness inside).

> 3. Just as planned for the forward library, it'd be good to
> let the lib use variadic templates and rvalue refs when
> available.

Yes.

> 
> Just my 2 cents,
> 	

Taking care of the pence for the pounds to take care of themselves :-).

Regards,
Tobias