On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Ronald Garcia
Hello Antony,
I have added PFR to the review schedule.
Best, Ron
On Jun 29, 2016, at 10:12 PM, Antony Polukhin
wrote:
Hello,
PODs Flat Reflection (or PFR) is a C++14 library that represents POD structures as tuples and provides tuple-like methods for PODs. Library
has
a set of predefined operators for PODs and useful functions for everyday use. Works with user-defined types without any macro or boilerplate code.
Library: https://github.com/apolukhin/magic_get Docs: http://apolukhin.github.io/magic_get/ Boost Library Incubator:
http://blincubator.com/bi_library/pfr-pod-flat-reflection/?gform_post_id=160...
Could the PODs Flat Reflection library be put on review schedule?
Anyone wishing to become a Review Manager for the library?
-- Best regards, Antony Polukhin
I'm relatively new to the Boost community, but I would be happy to be a review manager for PFR, especially if it would otherwise stagnate on the review queue. I think PFR is very intersting, and worthy of a Boost review. I spent 2 or 3 hours studying the implementation a couple of months ago, and I have recommended several people to check it out. I think it has value as an educational exercise in addition to its real-world use cases. There isn't a lot of code, so expect the review to be swift and straightforward. For what it's worth, I predict that the main point of contention during the review will be the fact that it ultimately relies on undefined behavior to work. Before scheduling the review, I would prefer for the documentation to include an explanation of where the magic (and the UB) actually occurs in the code. I closely followed the review of the Fit library, but I did not participate. I've also read some of the archives from the Boost.Hana review, and was very marginally involved with Hana's development after its acceptance. I use Boost at work, I follow the mailing list, I went to C++Now this year, and I'm working on my own library submission. Such is the extent of my involvement with Boost, so I am admittedly not an ideal candidate for a review manager. Thanks, Barrett