1. Should Mp11 be accepted into Boost?
Yes.
2. What is your evaluation of the design?
It appears to be robust. I'm not sure about the design decision mp_ prefix for everything.
What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I haven't looked at it in detail.
4. What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Good. Very good.
5. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
6. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
Quite high; should replace a lot of current boost MPL usage. problems? Only cursorily. With g++ 7.1 and clang++ 4.0. Did not encounter any problems.
8. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
Somewhat. To the extent that I've used boost MPL quite a lot. On 15 July 2017 at 15:49, Bjorn Reese via Boost-announce < boost-announce@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The formal review of Peter Dimov's Mp11 library is scheduled for July 15 - July 24, 2017 [1].
Mp11 is a C++11 metaprogramming library for compile-time manipulation of data structures that contain types. It’s based on template aliases and variadic templates and implements the approach outlined in the article "Simple C++ metaprogramming" [2] and its sequel [3]. These articles are useful background information for the review.
* Mp11 aims to make simple usage simple, and to support complex usage without complicating the simple use cases.
* Mp11 works on any type-list, whether its own type-list mp_list, or standard type-lists such as std::tuple and std::variant, or user-defined type-lists.
* Mp11 works with any meta-function, such as C++11 or Boost type-traits, or user-defined type-traits.
Mp11 can be found here:
* Documentation: https://rawgit.com/pdimov/mp11 /master/doc/html/mp11.html
* Source code: https://github.com/pdimov/mp11/tree/master
Please answer the following questions in your review [4]:
1. Should Mp11 be accepted into Boost? Please state all conditions for acceptance explicity.
2. What is your evaluation of the design?
3. What is your evaluation of the implementation?
4. What is your evaluation of the documentation?
5. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
6. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
7. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study?
8. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
[1] http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html [2] http://pdimov.com/cpp2/simple_cxx11_metaprogramming.html [3] http://pdimov.com/cpp2/simple_cxx11_metaprogramming_2.html [4] http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman /listinfo.cgi/boost-announce