On 3/18/17 19:48, Vladimir Batov via Boost wrote:
Would not that be better to contain the battle among the gurus, the lib developers. So that they are forced to cooperate, to consider alternatives, to come up with one best (in their collective opinion) solution... and leave the user out of it? Otherwise users are forced to consider 4 solutions, to evaluate those and to decide (potentially incorrectly) which one to use. As a user I personally do not have the resources and the knowledge to do that. Taking/choosing a Boost lib I've always known that there was a lot of effort spent evaluating, optimizing, improving, etc. the lib. So that I get the best I can get.
Users of these libraries are often library developers. Many of us have already implemented smallish TMP libraries that we use internally. I think the Boost community is the right community to review just this sort of library. Abusing compilers and meta programming rich libraries is what we are known for (for good or bad). I expect a combined review to tease out the best design choices and implementations and may even discover better solutions yet-to-be-discovered. micahel -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com