Re: [Boost-users] [Fit] upcoming formal review for Boost.Fit

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Fit] upcoming formal review for Boost.Fit
From: Matt Calabrese (rivorus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-28 19:11:34

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <
vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Dear Boost community,
>
> The formal review of Paul Fultz II's Fit library starts on Wednesday, 2nd March and ends on 13th March.
>
>
I'm looking through the documentation right now and it looks great, though
I have not used the library yet. Some suggestions -- I think the docs
really need a more formal motivation/tutorial section at the very front. It
starts with *what* the library is in very general terms, and jumps quickly
into what the library can do, but I think a bit of a narrative describing a
motivating example would help sell it to those who are not already more
familiar with the *why*. This is done a little bit, scattered throughout
the docs, but I find that the best docs usually tell something of a story.
This is just a request.

I suggest not using the name FunctionObject for something that is only
callable with a const object. This is a little more specific that what most
people refer to as a function object in C++ and may cause confusion.

I'm fairly certain that the reinterpret casting involved with
BOOST_FIT_STATIC_LAMBDA is UB.

-- 
-Matt Calabrese