Andy Little wrote:
normally, the review period of the Fixed Strings library written by Reece Dunn ended today. All we got so far are 3 reviews, which is too less to make a proper decision. I really would like to encourage you to submit a review for this library to get a representative result. For this reason I'ld like to extend the review period for another week until February 5th to allow for more reviews. I'm convinced, that a Fixed Strings library would make a good addition to Boost and in the end it should be useful to a lot more of people than to the 3 of us who send in a review.
A Fixed Strings library but this one? .
If you read my mail carefully - I never said 'this one'.
What interests me is that the fixed_string library is way ahead as the top download in the Vault download list, but few reviewers have resulted. I feel the mystery can be explained by the reviews so far. looking through them we have all said pretty much the same thing. Surprise that there is no overflow policy. Concern at the lack of detail in the documentation and the way the documentation and the class itself are laid out. IOW as currently implemented fixed_string isnt delivering what it seems to promise. I hope Reece takes this in his stride by the way . I would guess that has to be the reason why so many downloads have resulted in so little response. It must be worth analysing that lack of response as a first step in revisiting the design.
As you might have expected, I read through the reviews _very_ carefully. There are two reasons, why I proposed to extend this review. 1) The library was downloaded by more than 400 interested people and I don't expect the 3 reviews to represent all of them. 2) Even if the currently reviewed library won't be accepted to Boost mainly for the reasons stated by the three reviews, I think we need a Fixed Strings library in Boost and the more dicussion we get the better for a future library. Regards Hartmut