Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
Andy Little wrote:
I'm wondering if this doesnt bring up a point regarding this review. In hindsight was fixed_strings ready for review?
http://www.boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm#Review_Manager
In hindsight ,which is a wonderful thing, shouldnt review manager have stopped fixed_strings review? Can review manger stop a review?
I say this not to criticise Hartmut( I hope that experience as review manager will mean he will be interested to do the job again), but to enhance the character of the review managers role and point up this case as one example of what pitfalls review manager should look out for when thinking about future review requests.
Frankly, I was thinking about not to start the review for this library. And from todays point of view I shouldn't have done so. It's a learning curve for me as well and I certainly will be more proactive in this direction in the future.
In the end I decided to start the review regardless of the problems because I thought (and I still think) it's worth to have discussions about the kind of paradigm the Fixed Strings library represents and even if we had these concrete problems we also have had some very interesting and clearifying discussions on this topic.
When developing the library and discussing it on the list, I got some feedback, but that was different to the comments I got here. Because of this review, I have a list of areas in the design and documentation that need to be reworked in order to get it to review quality. This is a learning curve for me that will help me write better code and a better library in the future. I know that the library has been rejected for now, but there has been some discussion whether the library is actually needed as Dave pointed out. As Andy Little notes, there *is* interest in the library, so there appears to be a need for it. See you for round two :) - Reece