[on behalf of Ingolf Steinbach] -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Boost-announce] [review] Fast track review of Boost.Utility/Singleton begins today Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:46:54 +0100 From: Ingolf Steinbach To: John Torjo References: <478B978A.6090503@torjo.com> Hi, John. 2008/1/14, John Torjo :

* What is your evaluation of the design?

Some questions: 1. Shouldn't there be a protected d'tor in singleton in order to reduce the chance of mis-use (deletion via pointer to singleton)? 2. Why does instance have pointer-like (rather than reference-like) syntax? I know that GoF use pointers, but references typically make me feel better than pointers (or something that looks like one) which might be 0. 3. Is a private (or protected) my_singleton destructor supported without 'verbose "template...friend-making"'?

* What is your evaluation of the implementation?

Not evaluated.

* What is your evaluation of the documentation?

Not evaluated.

* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

I'd very much like to see this kind of library in boost. This one looks promising.

* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?

No. N/A. N/A

* How much effort did you put into your evaluation?

A glance only due to lack of spare time. Sorry .

* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

A little: I have written some template based singleton code myself and have read Andrei's MCPPD.

* Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?

I'd like to see the above issues addressed in some way. Apart from that, I have no objections. Kind regards Ingolf -- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right