[Boost-users] [Proto] review period extended to end March 28th

From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-13 20:20:58

Hi all,

There have been several requests to extend the Proto review period. For this
reason the review now will end on March 28th. 
This should give you sufficient time to have a closer look at the library
and to prepare a review.

The original announcement follows:

The review of Eric Nieblers Proto library starts today, March 1st 2008, and
will end on March 14th. 
I really hope to see your vote and your participation in the discussions on
the Boost mailing lists!

---------------------------------------------------

About the library:

Proto is a framework for building Domain Specific Embedded Languages in C++.
It provides tools for constructing, type-checking, transforming and
executing expression templates. More specifically, Proto provides:
 * An expression tree data structure.
 * Operator overloads for building the tree from an expression.
 * Utilities for defining the grammar to which an expression must conform.
 * An extensible mechanism for immediately executing an expression template.
 * An extensible set of tree transformations to apply to expression trees.
 * A mechanism for giving expressions additional behaviors and members.

Documentation is here:
http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/libs/proto

Download proto.zip from here:
http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?directory=Template%20Metapro
gramming

Proto is a very important infrastructure library, IHMO. It has been used as
the backbone for several other library writing efforts already, such as
Xpressive and the rewrite of Spirit (there it has been used for all three
parts: the parser, the lexer and the generator modules), and it is a key
enabling technology in the long-planned unification of Phoenix and the
Lambda Library.

---------------------------------------------------

Please always state in your review, whether you think the library should be
accepted as a Boost library!

Additionally please consider giving feedback on the following general
topics:

- What is your evaluation of the design?
- What is your evaluation of the implementation?
- What is your evaluation of the documentation?
- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
- Did you try to use the library?  With what compiler?  Did you have any
problems?
- How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?
- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Regards Hartmut
Review Manager