This is to remind everyone that we have a review going on at present for Tobias Schwinger's Function Types library. The review period is due to end on the 20th June, which gives everyone just this weekend to take a look at Tobias submission, I'd really like to encourage as many folks as possible to take a look: if necessary we'll also extend the end of the review period if there's demand or to cope with late reviews. We'd particularly like to hear from potential users of this library. Here are the details again: Available from the sandbox at: http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/vault/ or the zip file is: http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=function_types.zip&directory=& This library provides a metaprogramming facility to classify, decompose and synthesize function-, function pointer-, function reference- and member function pointer types. For the purpose of this documentation, these types are collectively referred to as function types (this differs from the standard definition and redefines the term from a programmer's perspective to refer to the most common types that involve functions). The classes introduced by this library shall conform to the concepts of the Boost Metaprogramming library (MPL). The Function Types library enables the user to: * test an arbitrary type for being a function type of specified kind, * inspect properties of function types, * view and modify sub types of an encapsulated function type with MPL Sequence operations, and * synthesize function types. This library supports variadic functions and can be configured to support non-default calling conventions. (The following is taken from : http://www.boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm ) Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: What is your evaluation of the design? What is your evaluation of the implementation? What is your evaluation of the documentation? What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. John Maddock (Function Types review manager).