GGL Review I'm very happy to see that that GGL is now ready for inclusion into boost. I have been following this library for the last couple of years. During that time, I have spent probably 5 hours looking over the code, reading the documentation and compiling the samples. I have a background in GIS applications. Count me as an enthusiastic supporter of this library and as a "yes" vote for inclusion into boost. I have no doubt that GGL will become one of the more popular libraries in boost. Thank you to Barend Gehrels, Bruno Lalande and Mateusz Loskot for submitting it to the public domain and to boost. The samples and tests are thorough and compile without errors or warnings on the latest version of the Intel compiler. The code follows all expected boost conventions. Tom Brinkman
Hi Tom, Thanks for your enthousiastic review.
The samples and tests are thorough and compile without errors or warnings on the latest version of the Intel compiler.
I'll add Intel to the list of compilers. The latest version is 11.1? Because I herewith come back to Paul's question:
I feel sure that someone has used the 'Standard' version with full optimisation. And perhaps the VS 2010 beta? The latter may be especially useful if it overcomes the difficulty Intellisense has in handling such a complex package without its intelligence circuits melting
In the meantime added are: - Visual Studio 2005 Professional / 2008 Team System ; by Mateusz - Visual Studio 2010 Professional Beta2 ; now added by myself (and indeed until now I didn't have Intellisense problems, but as they happened only occasionally that is not yet a guarantee) - gcc 3.4.5 coming with Qt Creator 1.2.1 ; by Chris on the GGL-mailing-list - Intel 11.1; now added by Tom Note that I'm not yet updating currently existing documentation pages to not confuse the review process. Regards, Barend
participants (2)
-
Barend Gehrels -
Tom Brinkman