On Dec 3, 2007 2:57 AM, John Torjo
* What is your evaluation of the design?
Clear enough. I would find the gref metafunction useful factored out in a separate include file (with a more descriptive name than gref like... forwardable<T>::type? lvalue_reference_to_which_is_bindable<T>::type :) ?)
* What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I agree with Dave on the EBO suggestion (and thanks for the compressed_pair lesson)
* What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Sufficient.
* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very useful. Although, I seem to run into cases where I want to have a forwarding function (not function object), or a forwarding operator. But maybe I'm wrong in preferring an actual function...
* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
GCC 4.0.1/darwin. I expanded the example from the docs a bit to where the forwarded function was polymorphic with varying return type. No problems.
* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study?
Read the docs, studied the implementation until I mostly understood what it was doing, contemplated it a bit, and gave it a quick try.
* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
I have a few bumps on my head, courtesy of the forwarding problem.
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.
Yes - thanks for another great contribution. Stjepan