On 2017-03-19 16:42, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
... Users of these libraries are often library developers. Many of us have already implemented smallish TMP libraries that we use internally. I think the Boost community is the right community to review just this sort of library. Abusing compilers and meta programming rich libraries is what we are known for (for good or bad).
I expect a combined review to tease out the best design choices and implementations and may even discover better solutions yet-to-be-discovered.
Probably... If you mean one review of a combined effort... essentially one (two?) consolidated library... maybe with currently separate libs made sections/parts of such a combined effort... and duplicate parts trimmed. All that trimming and negotiations and arguments IMO are better done backstage... maybe only with some bits and pieces taken to the list. Otherwise, if you mean several simultaneous reviews (as they are currently conducted) of competing functionally-overlapping libs, I suspect it to result in an overload, a lot of very public fighting and ultimately a stalemate. As always it is just my opinion. I can be dead wrong. I often am.