On 25 Aug 2015 at 8:17, Robert Ramey wrote:
Please answer the following questions:
1. Should Boost.AFIO be accepted into Boost? Please state all conditions for acceptance explicity.
Provisionally, yes.
Requirements: <snip>
This list of requirements constitutes much more than a "a few changes". It's impossible to know what what the library would like like after all these changes and and their repercussions were addressed. I don't think we can realistically expect the review manager to verify that and library with all these changes is sufficiently close the current one to take responsibility for signing off on the final version.
I read the provisional yes as meaning yes to how the library is roadmapped to look like in the future, and he recommends an additional mini-review at that point which could introduce yet another mini-review after again. In other words, he's saying fundamentally it's good, but needs a lot more work yet. Paul please do correct me if I am wrong in this interpretation. There is precedent for this: Boost.Fiber was provisionally approved here as a C++ 98 library with condition of a mini-review before entry. Boost.Fiber is now a C++ 14 library and sufficiently different from the library originally reviewed it may require a second mini-review if during its first mini-review it is felt still lacking. I think this pattern of repeated mini-reviews caused by changes to the common implementations of the C++ standard rather than the libraries themselves is going to be very common next few years. All these changes to AFIO are almost entirely driven by changes since 2012 to the various WG21 technical standards. If they hadn't changed and C++ compilers (specifically MSVC) hadn't changed, AFIO wouldn't have changed. It's very similar for Fiber, which had to be refactored in the face of substantial changes in C++ 14. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/