Re: [boost] [histogram] Finalising version for submission

On 22. Oct 2018, at 16:29, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:

...

If this is indeed a generally accepted practice, can we have it documented on the website, please?

It's not.

"At any time" is not generally accepted to include the time between the review and the appearance of the library in Boost, _unless the review manager and the people who gave positive reviews don't object_.

The switch from C++11 to C++14 would help me to make the library implementation simpler, it does not affect the user side. I originally chose C++11 to support older compilers, accepting the increased code complexity as a trade-off. But writing out-of-place structs in the detail namespace to emulate `if constexpr` is not really nice and now that I want to make the library even more flexible, I need to do something like `if constexpr` even more often. With C++14 I can at least emulate `if constexpr` with in-place lambdas, which makes the implementation more readable and compact. If the reviewers feel strongly about it, I will stick to C++11, but it was my impression that there was no strong preference for C++11. I was even asked the opposite by several people, e.g. by degski, why I was sticking to C++11 for a new library and whether the library could gain from C++14 or even C++17 features.

Something close to what was accepted is generally expected to appear in at least one Boost release. Bait and switch would not be fair to the reviewers and does not strike me as a particularly defensible practice.

I don't see myself "baiting and switching". I am implementing features that were requested during the review. I want to work through the wish-list before the library is released for the first time, because now I can still modify the interface if necessary. Once histogram is released with Boost, the interface is much harder to change. Best regards, Hans