Re: [boost] FW: FW: Proposal for a Differential Evolution C++ library
On 1/9/2012 9:11 AM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
I, for one, think this looks a very useful library.
But few of the Boosters who follow these lists will be expert or even potential users of this 'niche' topic - which is why I think you've not had a deservedly rave response ;-)
Thanks. I'm actually not surprised by the limited response for the exact reasons you mention, but I imagine this must have been the case with other libraries as well.
The documentation looks in a good state. The code looks clean and portable, but finding someone to run on a non-MSVC platforms would be useful - Boost likes to be *seen* to be portable.
I thought that was going to be a requirement in a later stage, after the library was accepted. Nevertheless, if somebody on this list is willing to test the library on a non MS platform and using a compiler different from Visual Studio, I will appreciated your help!
The folder structure should be 'Boost standard' so that it is possible to use bjam to build and use Boost.Test. (Do not hesitate to ask for help - bjam is the Outer Mongolian of computer languages and using it is a dark art!)
I'll look into it and make the necessary changes.
You will first need to find a review manager (preferably a Boost contributor), and it will be necessary to have some reviewers too! (Reviewers need not necessarily be currently active Boost followers for a specialist library like this - expertise is the key thing).
So you may need to find and drum up support from some potential (or better still, actual) users ?
The library was reviewed from a functional and conceptual standpoint by the creators of the DE algorithm and they seem to have validated it, maybe less so from a C++ standpoint though. I also received very useful feedback for further enhancements that I'll be adding in a future release. As far as a boost review manager and other reviewers, I can only count on list members that are willing to volunteer some of their time for this purpose (please let me know if interested). I'll also try to gather some support outside of the list. One of the nice things about DE is that it is relatively simple and generic, and it doesn't require any advanced or domain specific knowledge, so I'm sure anybody on this list could learn enough about it to be able to review the library, without spending too much time and effort. Adrian Michel www.tradery.com
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Michel Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:04 AM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] FW: FW: Proposal for a Differential Evolution C++library
On 1/9/2012 9:11 AM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
I, for one, think this looks a very useful library.
But few of the Boosters who follow these lists will be expert or
even
potential users of this 'niche' topic - which is why I think you've not had a deservedly rave response ;-)
Thanks. I'm actually not surprised by the limited response for the exact reasons you mention, but I imagine this must have been the case with other libraries as well.
The documentation looks in a good state. The code looks clean and
I am interested in the library. I have used lilGP and several others. portable,
but finding someone to run on a non-MSVC platforms would be useful - Boost likes to be *seen* to be portable.
I can help test on i686, amd64 and arm9 running linux.
I thought that was going to be a requirement in a later stage, after
library was accepted. Nevertheless, if somebody on this list is willing to test the library on a non MS platform and using a compiler different from Visual Studio, I will appreciated your help!
The folder structure should be 'Boost standard' so that it is
use bjam to build and use Boost.Test. (Do not hesitate to ask for help - bjam is the Outer Mongolian of computer languages and using it is a dark art!)
I'll look into it and make the necessary changes.
You will first need to find a review manager (preferably a Boost contributor), and it will be necessary to have some reviewers too! (Reviewers need not
necessarily be
currently active Boost followers for a specialist library like this - expertise is the key
the possible to thing).
So you may need to find and drum up support from some potential (or
better
still, actual) users ?
The library was reviewed from a functional and conceptual standpoint by the creators of the DE algorithm and they seem to have validated it, maybe less so from a C++ standpoint though. I also received very useful feedback for further enhancements that I'll be adding in a future release.
As far as a boost review manager and other reviewers, I can only count on list members that are willing to volunteer some of their time for this purpose (please let me know if interested). I'll also try to gather some support outside of the list.
One of the nice things about DE is that it is relatively simple and generic, and it doesn't require any advanced or domain specific knowledge, so I'm sure anybody on this list could learn enough about it to be able to review the library, without spending too much time and effort.
Adrian Michel www.tradery.com
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
participants (2)
-
Adrian Michel -
Graham, Jeff