| -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Pavel Vozenilek | Sent: 01 March 2005 14:31 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: [boost] More reviewers wanted: FSM review extended | until Mar 6th | | even short opinions on this library are much welcomed. Presumptive mode ON ;-) | So now is your chance to recommend this tool into Boost | Here are some questions you might want to answer in | your review: | | * What is your evaluation of the documentation? | How easy (or hard) it is to understand library | features? What can be improved? Tutorial and examples are helpful and well written (and refer to guides on why you would want to use FSM/UML) and enough to get started. | * What is your evaluation of the design? Not qualified to judge. | | * The library documentation contains | few not yet solved issues (name, | separating the library into two parts, | exception handling). What is you opinion here? OK - could be changed in the light of more user feedback (but we won't get that until accepted into Boost?) | * What is your evaluation of the implementation? | Are there parts of code too obscure or | duplicating exiting Boost functionality? | Can something be factored out to standalone | library or among general utilities? Not qualified to judge, but code _looks_ up to standard. | | * Are there performance bottlenecks? | Does the library design fit requirements | of real-time systems? How is it useable | for embedded systems? | Is the documentation clear on performance | tradeoffs? Yes - but guidance on suitable applications during review could be added. | | * What is your evaluation of the potential | usefulness of the library? More useful than some might think. Maintainability seems strongest factor. | Can you compare this FSM to other implementations? | * Did you try to use the library? Only ran stopwatch OK on MS 8.0 | * How much effort did you put into your | evaluation? A quick reading? | * Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? No. | * Do you think the library should be accepted as a | Boost library? Yes