on Tue Sep 30 2008, "Peter Dimov" <pdimov-AT-pdimov.com> wrote:
David Abrahams: ...
If I were to vote, I think I would feel obliged to vote no despite my implicit trust in Joel's abilities and sense of responsibility that tells me it'll probably turn out alright. It's frustrating that we've managed to get ourselves in this situation, but I don't think we should ever be reviewing code that isn't what the author intends to release.
I think I disagree, for entirely practical reasons. First, I very much suspect that the relative lack of exposure to the wider Boost community has held Phoenix back. It would have been a better library now had it been at top level.
Agreed 100%. I wish it were at the top level long ago... before the proto rewrite was even initiated.
More so, had it been labeled as the way forward for Lambda users.
It has been so labelled, but only unofficially. I for one have been itching to jump.
For me, this formal review, formal in the formality sense, has already been delayed far too much.
Also agreed 100%.
Second, things always take longer than planned. Waiting for Phoenix V3 may turn out to not be a particularly good idea, in hindsight.
Again, agreed.
PS: lambda()[ ... ] should work and be an alias for lambda[ ... ]. :-)
Would be nice. So, we agree. On what point were you disagreeing with me? :-) -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com