December 2007 - Boost-announce - lists.preview.boost.org

Re: [Boost-announce] [Boost-users] [review] Boost.Functional/Factory library result : accepted
by John Torjo 30 Dec '07

30 Dec '07

Tobias Schwinger wrote: > John Torjo wrote: > >> We've received 3 reviews, all positive: Larry Evans, Stejan Rajko, and >> Detlef Wilkening*. >> > > I count five with Cromwell Enage and Nat Goodspeed. > > Ouch, sorry for missing these. I need to to pay more attention to boost-users list... Yes, you're right - 5 reviews, sorry again. Best, John > I'd like to thank all who participated including the review manager and > those throwing in comments. > > Happy new year! > > > Regards, > Tobias > > _______________________________________________ > Boost-users mailing list > Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users > > -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review] Boost.Functional/Factory library result : accepted
by John Torjo 30 Dec '07

30 Dec '07

Hi all, The Boost.Functional/Factory library, submitted by Tobias Schwinger has been *accepted*. Thanks to all reviewers and to all who contributed before the review! We've received 3 reviews, all positive: Larry Evans, Stejan Rajko, and Detlef Wilkening*. *Suggested improvements * *Implementation *- Allocator should be inherited *Docs *- should include some hint about how to overcome the Lvalue constraint on the arguments that's mentioned in the docs: a0...aN - argument LValues to a constructor of T - separate the two templates (factory and value_factory) a little bit more in the introduction so that it reinforces that they are different in usage - better motivation - more detailed examples * note: I consider Detlef's review positive, even though he wanted 3 extensions (in light of Tobias's answer): - Better name for factory: factory_ptr or factory_pointer. - Better motivation for beginners in the docu. - Extension with a third template parameter for e.g. 2 phase construcion. Best, John -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review] Formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library - extended until sunday
by John Torjo 21 Dec '07

21 Dec '07

Hi all, I've extended the review until Sunday (inclusive). I'm hoping for more reviews. So far, we've had only two. If you are interested in the library (you should be :)), please take some time to review it. This is the info you need to do a review on: *Description* Factories are callback mechanisms for constructors, so we provide two function objects, boost::value_factory and boost::factory, that encasulate object construction through direct application of the constructor or operator new, respectively. These templates make other facilities that operate on function objects (such as standard algorithms, Boost.Bind, Boost.Function, or Fusion functional adapters) applicable to constructors. *Author* Tobias Schwinger *Download* Get it from here: http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filenam… Read documentation online here: http://torjo.com/tobias/ What to include in Review Comments ================================== Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: * 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? And finally, every review should answer this question: * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Best, John Torjo - Review Manager - -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review] Formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library - 2 days left
by John Torjo 20 Dec '07

20 Dec '07

Hi all, There are only 2 days left from the formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library. We've had just one review, and we need more. If you are interested in the library (you should be :)), please take some time to review it. This is the info you need to do a review on: *Description* Factories are callback mechanisms for constructors, so we provide two function objects, boost::value_factory and boost::factory, that encasulate object construction through direct application of the constructor or operator new, respectively. These templates make other facilities that operate on function objects (such as standard algorithms, Boost.Bind, Boost.Function, or Fusion functional adapters) applicable to constructors. *Author* Tobias Schwinger *Download* Get it from here: http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filenam… Read documentation online here: http://torjo.com/tobias/ What to include in Review Comments ================================== Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: * 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? And finally, every review should answer this question: * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Best, John Torjo - Review Manager - -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review][unordered] Unordered accepted
by Ion Gaztañaga 19 Dec '07

19 Dec '07

Hi to all, The Unordered library submitted by Daniel James has been *accepted* into Boost. Thanks to all reviewers and all who contributed to the library before the review. We've received 8 reviews (Thosten Ottosen, Chun Ping Wang, Hervé Brönnimann, John Torjo, Cromwell Enage, Jamie Allsop, Graham Mark and Paul Bristow), and all were positive (since Chun's only complain was packaging and his ratings were all above 7 out of 10). Darren Cook privately sent me a positive mini-review (attached below). If I've missed any review, please let me know. I plan to write a post this weekend with a summary of requests/suggestions and Daniel's replies. Congrats Daniel! Regards, Ion /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Hi Ion, Not critical but the images seem to be missing. E.g. on http://igaztanaga.drivehq.com/unordered/unordered/buckets.html If I find time I will try out the library and write a review in the week, but here is a mini-review (feel free to forward to the list - I'm not subscribed at the moment): Documentation: * Fine * The concrete examples of how to use a custom type, and a custom hash function, and do everything in portable TR1, are wonderful - I've searched before and never been able to find something as clear as this seems to be. * In Table 1.4: "No equivalent. No idea why." is not very Boost-like :-) . Isn't the reason simply that there is no ordering in hash containers, so therefore no ordering function? > > * What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? > > * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Yes. It is essential it gets into Boost as rapidly as possible; in fact I think it should be released as a patch to the current release. Having all of TR1 except for the hashed containers is a nasty red pimple on the otherwise very handsome nose of Boost. In particular, Visual C++ *still* does not ship with TR1 ("no plans until 2009" was the rumour I found), so anyone wanting to ship portable code is relying on Boost. And, at least for me, unordered_map is the single most useful library in TR1. Darren

1 0

[review] Formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library begins today
by John Torjo 17 Dec '07

17 Dec '07

Hi all, Today starts the formal Fast-Track review of the Boost.Functional/Factory library. *Description* Factories are callback mechanisms for constructors, so we provide two function objects, boost::value_factory and boost::factory, that encasulate object construction through direct application of the constructor or operator new, respectively. These templates make other facilities that operate on function objects (such as standard algorithms, Boost.Bind, Boost.Function, or Fusion functional adapters) applicable to constructors. *Author* Tobias Schwinger *Download* Get it from here: http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filenam… Read documentation online here: http://torjo.com/tobias/ What to include in Review Comments ================================== Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: * 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? And finally, every review should answer this question: * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Best, John Torjo - Review Manager - -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

BoostCon 2008: May 4-9
by David Abrahams 17 Dec '07

17 Dec '07

The 2nd annual Boost Conference has been scheduled for May 4-9 2008. Please save the date! Registration should open sometime in the next week. If you want to stay at the Aspen Meadows (highly recommended as it is within walking distance of the conference venue and was the site of great after-hours discussions in '07), it's especially important this year that you book your rooms early. Since, unlike last year, Aspen's airport will be open this May, demand for rooms has been heavy. In fact, the following week, which we tried to get, was snapped up by another group before we even had a chance to catch our breath, just weeks after BoostCon'07 ended. We'll be working hard on getting the program together for 2008 over the coming weeks. We hope to include many more Boost authors and contributors, and build in several more intensive library-specific sessions, to make 2008 better than ever. Please send any questions to the BoostCon planning committee at: boostcon-plan(a)lists.boost-consulting.com Those of you who didn't make it to BoostCon'07 may want to have a look at the photo gallery at http://boostcon.com/community/photos, peruse the 2007 program at http://boostcon.com/program, and check out the two trip reports mentioned here: http://boostcon.com/news/2007/Jul/16/yet-another-trip-report. See you in Aspen! -- The BoostCon Planning Committee

1 0

Re: [Boost-announce] [boost] [review] Gentle reminder - Fast track formal review of Boost.Functional/Factory will begin December 17
by John Torjo 13 Dec '07

13 Dec '07

Joel de Guzman wrote: > John Torjo wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This is a gentle reminder of the Boost.Functional/Factory review, about >> to start next Monday. >> >> >> Factories are callback mechanisms for constructors, so we provide two >> function objects, boost::value_factory and boost::factory, that >> encasulate object construction through direct application of the >> constructor or operator new, respectively. These templates make other >> facilities that operate on function objects (such as standard >> algorithms, Boost.Bind, Boost.Function, or Fusion functional adapters) >> applicable to constructors. >> >> Get it from here: >> http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filenam… >> > > Link to docs please? Thanks! > > I've posted them temporarily on my site - http://www.torjo.com/tobias/ Best, John -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review] Gentle reminder - Fast track formal review of Boost.Functional/Factory will begin December 17
by John Torjo 12 Dec '07

12 Dec '07

Hi all, This is a gentle reminder of the Boost.Functional/Factory review, about to start next Monday. Factories are callback mechanisms for constructors, so we provide two function objects, boost::value_factory and boost::factory, that encasulate object construction through direct application of the constructor or operator new, respectively. These templates make other facilities that operate on function objects (such as standard algorithms, Boost.Bind, Boost.Function, or Fusion functional adapters) applicable to constructors. Get it from here: http://www.boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filenam… Best, John -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0

[review] Boost.Functional/Forward - result
by John Torjo 12 Dec '07

12 Dec '07

Hi all, I'm happy to announce that The Boost.Functional/Forward library has been accepted into Boost. Congrats to Tobias for a great lib! Summary: 5 reviews, all positive. Suggestions for improvement: - Automatically detect if the compiler supports variadic templates and rvalue references and use those instead. This can be a useful portability utility when such compilers become more common. - It should use compressed_pair to store the wrapped function object to take advantage of EBO. - more tweakable parameters for specific uses - like, arity 3 for function X, and arity 5 for function Y - Docs: add more material explaining the forwarding problem - Docs: should be explicitly specified that the wrapped function object must be result_of compatible - Docs: A discussion of the impact of the library on compile time (especially with high values of N) Best, John -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right

1 0