On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Daniel Walker <daniel.j.walker@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 5:26 AM, shunsuke <pstade.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Giovanni Piero Deretta wrote:
Unfortunately I think that with so few reviews (just mine for now?), the library will have an hard time getting into Boost at this time. Probably the author didn't do a good job at selling it, even if many expressed interest in the past.
If the library were to be rejected, I think that the author should resubmit a just a subset of it for inclusion, which would have a far greater chance to be appreciated and evaluated in a short time.
This subset, IMHO, should concentrate on stateless function objects and should at least contain: <snip/> Other advanced features, like pipability and infix notation (I like this one!) could then be evaluated once the basic functionality has been sold :). So should more hard-core functional capabilities like memoization and the fix point combinator. Support for static initialization of function objects could also come in a second time.
It would be a good idea. But I'm going to give up mainly because of lack of interests and documentation skills.
Well, I wouldn't throw in the towel just yet!
Yes, It would be a pity!
I think Giovanni's suggestion to resubmit a subset of the library may be a very good idea. Keep it simple. A simpler library would also be easier to review. You brought up some interesting points in your response to my comments on Tuesday (especially regarding the usefulness of egg::lazy) and I've been thinking about it on and off all week. I believe there may be a real opportunity here, if you don't mind refractoring things a bit. Oh, and I hereby volunteer to help with the documentation, if you like.
I'm willing to help too! (but be aware that I'm not an English speaker and I've been known to slack in producing the documentation for my own library). -- gpd