Daniel James ha escrito:
Hello everyone,
I've just uploaded a new version of the unordered associative containers, this time in the 'Hash' folder on the file vault. There's also the file 'hash.tar.gz', which is just the hash function object. The hash function objects are ready for review, the container library is almost ready, it mainly just needs more documentation.
The implementation has been split into two libraries. Boost.Hash implements the hash function objects which would go into <functional>, so it is proposed that these are added to the functional library. This is needed for Joaquín's MultiIndex library, so it would be good to add it to Boost as soon as possible.
The other part is Boost.Unordered, which implements the unordered associative containers. This is a little larger and more complicated, and there's no immediate need for it (unless you count Boost.Tr1).
We're not sure what kind of review these libraries will need. Since they're both based on the draft standard, their design isn't really up for review here (right?), but the documentation and implementation is. Do you think they require a full review, or will a fast track review be appropriate?
A fast track review is tentatively scheduled for the hash function objects after the review of the finite state machine, with Thorsten managing it. The full container library could be included in this, if that is considered acceptable. Or it could be added to the queue for a full review?
Any opinions?
My opinion is that Boost.Hash should be fasttrack reviewed (Doug went for immediate committing, but IMHO a little review cannot hurt.) As for BoostUnordered, I really don't think it qualifies for fasttrack review (see the requirements at http://boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm#Fast-Track). Nonetheless, it'd probably be possible to shedule a shorter than normal review, since as Daniel points out, the design is pretty much out of question. My 2c, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo