I thought I'd get my limited review in early.
On 10 June 2017 at 07:25, Frédéric Bron via Boost
- What is your evaluation of the design?
Simple and therefore good.
- What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I'm not qualified in this domain, but the code is more than mature, so I think it's safe to assume that all the issues are ironed out.
- What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Good, a clear and short exposition of the problem and the solutions that this library provides. Simple examples to get you up and running in 10 minutes. It adheres to Robert's requirements for I library, I would say.
- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very usefull, it solves a complex (unicode) issue in an easy (as in, forget about it) and transparent way.
- Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
I have been using this library for years (5-6 maybe, I'm guessing here, it's too long ago with VS2008-VS2015, Clang-3.8-Clang-4.0, ICC-9-ICC13). No, I never have had problems with it and I already integrate the building of this library in the boost build processs (since boost 1.54 approx.). In it's current form it already builds without issue (with bjam) after dropping the code in the right spot in the boost source-tree.
- How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study?
I obviously did in the past and just started using it.
- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
No, that's why I need the library.
And most importantly: - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion.
YES, not a doubt in my mind and my thanks and appreciation go to Artyom Beilis. degski -- "*Ihre sogenannte Religion wirkt bloß wie ein Opiat reizend, betäubend, Schmerzen aus Schwäche stillend.*" - Novalis 1798