Hi Stjepan, Stjepan Rajko wrote:
- What is your evaluation of the documentation?
The general documentation, tutorials on different tasks and the examples are nicely organized and well written. After reading parts of the documentation, I was able to understand what the library was for, what its advantages and disadvantages are, and a good enough idea of how to use it.
The reference section is very detailed but hard to navigate. After going to the .hpp reference page, I had to figure out that I need to click on any of the class names for more information, and then faced a dump of all members. Some grouping of the member functions according to their use (even just using white space to separate them) would be nice. I really appreciated the complexity discussions.
The reference section was generated using Boost Quickbook/Boostbook/Doxygen toolkit, and I'm pretty it can be improved, but I don't know if what you are asking is possible. Maybe I should just write the reference myself instead of using the toolkit, but it's a lot of work to do if the reference is good enough. But reviewers have the last word.
Overview page:
Semantically, a Boost.Intrusivecontainer is similar -- space missing Boost.Intrusive<->container
Ok.
Presenting Boost.Intrusive containers page:
Non-raw pointers: If the wants to use smart pointers instead of raw pointers -- If the _user_(?) wants
Thanks.
Cloning Boost.Intrusive containers page:
The second parameter is an function object that will clone value_type objects returning a pointer to them. -- is _a_ function.
Ok.
Although, this sentence struck me as slightly confusing - perhaps something like "that will clone value_type objects and return a pointer to the clone."?
Ok.
The second parameter is an function object that will destroy value_type objects. -- is _a_ function object
Ok.
The word concepts seems to be getting more and more of a specific meaning in C++... I don't know whether there is another word that means the same thing as "concepts" but isn't "concepts", but if you can think of one it might be good.
I think concepts is fine.
std::pair< iterator, bool > insert(value_type & value) ;
Returns: If the value is not already present inserts it and returns a pair containing the iterator to the new value and true. If the value is already present returns a pair containing an iterator to the already present value and false.
-- I don't think this is quite correct. The behavior I observed is that the value is inserted if there are no elements equivalent to it in the set, according to the comparison function. Not quite the same as "if the value is not already present", I think.
Ok. With intrusive containers "tehere is no equivalent value" should be better, because the value itself could be already inserted in the container.
- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very useful. I really appreciate the possibilites that it presents and the associated advantages, as per the documentation.
Thanks!
And finally, every review should answer this question: - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
Yes. Really nice work!
Good vote! Regards, Ion