I added several algorithms that extent STL algorithms set. I use them in my Boost.Test development. But since they seems to be generic and IMO should be
Mini-reviews would be very useful. I�m shur that each boost developer/user could contribute a few small, useful algorithms. It would be a great way to increase the level of participation by developers who want to contribute but don�t have the time to write a complete library. To get things started, as Review Manager, I could start by collecting submissions by other boost members and present them to the group monthly or bi-monthly. We could call this the Monthly Boost Algorithms review. (I have at-least ten algorithms that I could contribute for consideration for the first few reviews.) We should also discuss to where to place the algorithms /code within the boost namespace. I could create a document that lists all the algorithms under consideration with a small summary. The boost members could than accept/reject each algorithm and offer suggestions. More to follow in the next few day� Any thoughts? Tom Brinkman reportbase@yahoo.com Review Wizard On May 23, 2004, at 6:06 AM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote: present in STL I propose to push them in boost/algorithm.hpp (or under boost/algorithm). I remember there was a discussion already about these algorithms. On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 Herv� Br�nnimann` wrote:
There was an idea of mini-reviews tossed around. This wouldn't include range / container traits (as Thorsten Ottosen or John Torjo are doing) since it's a much bigger scope, but for one or two functions, a single header, it seems an overkill to have a review. Can we have an Algorithms Review Manager under the Review Manager (as he see fits to forward requests) for the subspace boost::algorithm?
_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com