Subject: Re: [boost] [review] Review of Outcome v2 (Fri-19-Jan to Sun-28-Jan, 2018)
From: Fletcher, John P (j.p.fletcher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-28 23:34:23
Here is my review see the answers below.
________________________________________
From: Boost [boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] on behalf of charleyb123 . via Boost [boost_at_[hidden]]
Sent: 18 January 2018 22:07
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Cc: charleyb123 .
Subject: [boost] [review] Review of Outcome v2 (Fri-19-Jan to Sun-28-Jan, 2018)
Hi, Everyone,
The formal review of Niall Douglas' Outcome (v2) library begins Fri-19-Jan
and continues until Sun-28-Jan, 2018.
YOUR REVIEW
---------------------
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?
I have only looked at a limited part of the design, outcome::outcome as it is relevant to the use case which is of interest to me. The part I have looked at seems fine to me.
- What is your evaluation of the implementation?
The implementation of the ideas appears to be consistent.
- What is your evaluation of the documentation?
The documentation made available is not consistent with the Boost implementation. e.g. macro names (BOOST_OUTCOME_TRY vs OUTCOME_TRY). I beleive other people have raised this.
- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
The library is very useful for the use case I have in mind, a Boost library which makes a small use of exceptions to cope with a small number of difficult cases.
- Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
problems?
I have run some of the examples in src/snippets and adapted them into my own examples. I have run these with Clang 4.0 and libc++ with C++14 and Boost 1.66.0. Once I had located the header and namespace this has not been a problem. I am running on Ubuntu Linux.
- How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?
Not as much as I would have liked, hence the fact I have not looked at everything.
- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
I have worked on functional codes for a number of years and contributed to several recent reviews.
And most importantly:
- Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
YES subject to sorting out the documentation, which other people have already mentioned.
Best wishes
John Fletcher