On 6/12/2017 12:20 AM, Frédéric Bron via Boost wrote:
Hi Everyone,
The formal review of Artyom Beilis' Nowide library starts today and will last until Wed. 21st of June.
Your participation is encouraged, as the proposed library is uncoupled, focused and rather small. Nowadays, everyone needs to handle Unicode but this is very difficult using only the standard library in a platform independant way. Nowide offers a very simple way to handle Unicode the same way on Windows/MacOS/Linux.
Key features:
* work with UTF-8 in your code, Nowide converts to OS encoding * Easy to use functions for converting UTF-8 to/from UTF-16 * A class to fixing argc, argc and env main parameters to use UTF-8 * UTF-8 aware functions: - stdio.h functions (fopen, freopen, remove, rename) - stdlib.h functions (system, getenv, setenv, unsetenv, putenv) - fstream (filebuf, fstream/ofstream/ifstream) - iostream (cout, cerr, clog, cin)
Documentation: http://cppcms.com/files/nowide/html
GitHub: https://github.com/artyom-beilis/nowide git clone https://github.com/artyom-beilis/nowide.git
Latest tarballs: - to be unzipped in boost source: https://github.com/artyom-beilis/nowide/archive/master.zip - as a standalone library: http://cppcms.com/files/nowide/nowide_standalone.zip
Nowide has standard boost layout. So, just put it into the boost source tree under libs/nowide directory for building and running tests. Or alternatively - for header only part of the library add the nowide/include path to the include path of your projects.
How do I build the documentation for the nowide library ?
Please post your comments and review to the boost mailing list (preferably), or privately to the Review Manager (to me ;-). 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 most importantly: - 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.
For more information about Boost Formal Review Process, see: http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html
Thank you very much for your time and efforts.
Frédéric