On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Lars Viklund <zao@acc.umu.se> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 07:43:32AM +1000, Vadim Stadnik wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Lars Viklund <zao@acc.umu.se> wrote:
How does this library fare after the advent of Boost.Containers? From the description, it sounds like it overlaps quite a bit, to the extent that it can likely be merged with it.
The library uses new data structures with improved computational complexity of many algorithms against data structures used in C++ standard containers. This is why this library supersedes facilities of standard containers. I will add a section to the documentation with specific improvements.
Very good, but I didn't ask about the standard containers, I asked about Boost.Container [1]. Do yours overlap with his? Is your library really distinct enough to be a different library instead of merging with Ion's library?
It just feels quite strange to have two libraries that both claim to be "better containers, lol".
The previous version of stl_ext_adv was thoroughly reviewed by Joaquín M López Muñoz. Boost does not have containers based on advanced data structures, but your point is perfectly valid and the comparison with Boost.Container should be added to the documentation. Also, I think that merge of new and existing containers into one library is possible provided that they support the same interfaces.
Additionally, surely there's a better name than "STL extensions"? First
of all, some people (me) truly dislike the STL misnomer. Secondly, it doesn't convey no information about what it actually extends/provides.
The full library name is “STL extensions based on advanced data structures“. I have shortened the name to “STL extensions” for the Review Schedule only. It seems to me it is quite reasonable. For example, CGAL offers Multiset container with similar advanced functionality and uses name “STL Extensions for CGAL”. Suggestions are welcome.
It's kind of hard naming what essentially seems to be a container library, considering that there already exists one. I still hold my opinion that "STL extensions for blargh" makes a really horrible Boost library name.
These questions will come up constantly during the review, so you might as well get everything sorted out up-front.
I agree that right naming a library is a difficult task. Alternative names, such as “Advanced containers” or even “Container++”, are possible. Let us see what other experts think.