On 2017-09-09 01:34, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:
How is the review process moving on? I have a clear need for this in my code right now.
Would love to see it get protection from obscurity by being accepted into boost sometime soon.
Thank you for your interest and encouragement. Much appreciated. RE: review As for the actual review, then (unfortunately) there is no one. From my understanding the Boost review process has changed and now a submission is only scheduled for a review IFF it gets a review manager. It is not a position people queue for. :-) So, no one has come forward for impl_ptr to be a review manager... as I can see for other submissions also... Before such a manager-less submission would be put in the queue and stay on the radar... Now such a submission generates initial interest on the list, then drifts out of the scope and is left behind/forgotten. It's unfortunate. RE: obscurity You might consider going to https://github.com/yet-another-user/pimpl and adding a star to the project. It raises its visibility in a GitHub search with everything following. RE: accepted into boost Initially I personally had my doubts if it was not too simple, obvious and basic. Now Giel van Schijndel joined in and made immense contributions/improvements to all policies. Namely, 'unique' and 'copied' policies are std::unique_ptr-based and pimpl-objects are of the 'void*' size... no memory overhead!.. Hugely useful IMO. Then, for high performance two in-place (no dyn. mem. allocation) policies are really well-done with one such policy not having any mem. overhead at all. So, IMO the submission has certainly something to offer functionality-wise and deployment-wise beyond manual pimpl-idiom implementation and would be a useful addition to the existing set of smart pointers...