Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
* What is your evaluation of the design?
Ok.
* What is your evaluation of the implementation?
I like it. Did not go into too much detail, but from what I've looked at, it's ok. One thing I don't like is the initialization of boost::flyweight: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/flyweight/libs/flyweight/doc/tutorial... I think there could be a simpler way to do this: http://www.entropygames.net/globals.htm
* What is your evaluation of the documentation?
Very nice - I had no problem reading through the basics. Did not look much at extending the lib.
* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very useful.
* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
No.
* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study?
I've looked at the docs a few times; the time spent would be around 1.5h .
* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
I've implemented something like this, but at a much smaller scale.
And finally, every review should answer this question:
* 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. Best, John
Ion Gaztañaga - Review Manager - _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert ... call me only if you want things done right