Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:24 AM, Michael Fawcett <michael.fawcett@gmail.com> wrote:
Regardless, the point I was trying to make was that (to me) the interface is more important than the implementation at this stage in the library's life, and that I don't think it's fair to base acceptance solely on whether the implementation is 100% robust and numerically stable unless the documentation states says otherwise.
Hi Michael, This is a very important point in which many agree completely. This is an issue related to updating the Boost review process. The summary to me is that a proposed libary should not merit a Boost review if its scope doesn't match Boost goals (clearly stated at the beginning of the home page). It's for this reason that I argued strongly to Fernando that Boost.Polygon should be withdrawn to avoid setting a precedent (despite of other technical merits the library has!) regards