On 2017-09-09 17:12, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:
Hi Vladimir, great to see that good has come of the review process.
Well, to clarify -- there was no Boost review... There was some initial (and very useful) input to my submission request but Boost-wise the submission did not get anywhere... as the review mgr could not be found... so far anyway. Still, something good indeed has come of as after Giel's effort impl_ptr is a serious smart pointer for the purpose.
If you'll allow my first commit to add a CMakeLists.txt file I'll happily just start using it and contributing where possible.
All contributions are most and truly welcome. For starters I'd suggest you fork the project first into your GitHub userspace. Apply your changes. Then, submit a pull request, Giel or I will be happy to merge it in. I might not be able to do that for a few more days (I am away). Looking forward to your input.
On 8 September 2017 at 22:53, Vladimir Batov wrote:
On 2017-09-09 01:34, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:
How is the review process moving on? I have a clear need for this in my code right now.
Would love to see it get protection from obscurity by being accepted into boost sometime soon.
Thank you for your interest and encouragement. Much appreciated.
RE: review
As for the actual review, then (unfortunately) there is no one. From my understanding the Boost review process has changed and now a submission is only scheduled for a review IFF it gets a review manager. It is not a position people queue for. :-) So, no one has come forward for impl_ptr to be a review manager... as I can see for other submissions also... Before such a manager-less submission would be put in the queue and stay on the radar... Now such a submission generates initial interest on the list, then drifts out of the scope and is left behind/forgotten. It's unfortunate.
RE: obscurity
You might consider going to https://github.com/yet-another-user/pimpl and adding a star to the project. It raises its visibility in a GitHub search with everything following.
RE: accepted into boost
Initially I personally had my doubts if it was not too simple, obvious and basic. Now Giel van Schijndel joined in and made immense contributions/improvements to all policies. Namely, 'unique' and 'copied' policies are std::unique_ptr-based and pimpl-objects are of the 'void*' size... no memory overhead!.. Hugely useful IMO. Then, for high performance two in-place (no dyn. mem. allocation) policies are really well-done with one such policy not having any mem. overhead at all. So, IMO the submission has certainly something to offer functionality-wise and deployment-wise beyond manual pimpl-idiom implementation and would be a useful addition to the existing set of smart pointers...