Re: [Boost-users] [Review] UUID library (mini-)review starts today, November 23rd

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Review] UUID library (mini-)review starts today, November 23rd
From: muhammadchang (kennethlaskoski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-03 00:21:52

Hi boosters,

First of all, my opinion is that this kind of classes, sometimes called
concrete types, are the very plus plus suggested by the language's name. A
well designed user type behaves and cost, exactly the same as any built in
type. This makes C++ unique in the plethora of available languages.
That said, I must mention that I am aware of the flaws pointed out by many
reviewers, specially those concerning interface. In particular, I don't like
the "default null constructor". For me, the default constructor MUST
generate a valid object, period. I have already copied/used Andy's code,
which I luckily found in your vault, and one thing I changed was this
default constructor [uuid_t uuid; // generates a valid random uuid]. If the
user is short of resources, she must use the copy constructor [uuid_t
nil(uuid_t::null());]. But I don't provide a bool is_null() const; method,
for operator==() does the job pretty well.
Despite this weaknesses, I think the library is ready for out-of-the-box
usage, so my vote is YES, this library should be part of boost.

Sincerely,
Kenneth

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-Review--UUID-library-%28mini-%29review-starts-today%2C-November-23rd-tp20652849p20807056.html
Sent from the Boost - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.