jeff ha escrito:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:07:54 -0600, David B. Held wrote > > > I'd say 6 or 7 people expressing interest is more than enough to justify > > Boostifying the code at this stage. > > I agree. Since you have written an article which clearly describes > the concept and provides an example it seems to me that you should > be able to as for preliminary review from interested parties before > you boostify the documentation. > > OK, so how I ask for preliminary review? Posting a mail here? I don't really know how to start this process, whether some formality is required or not. [stuff deleted] > > > Also, it looks like the early consensus is that multi-key/value > > support is desired, so I think we should have a good look at your > > implementation/design to see if it is general enough. > > While a few folks have asked for this, it is up to you if you really want to > take on the additional burden. Submitting, going thru the review, porting and > maintaining a boost library is a huge amount of effort. While I think a > generic multi-key container would be really cool, it is up to you to accept > that scope. I, for one, would rather see a good bi-directional map sooner > rather than waiting for a more general solution. I honestly can't think of a > case where I would have needed the more general solution and I there is always > a complexity tradeoff. To the best of my knowledge, it is very difficult to fit an n-key container, where n>2, into the interface of a map. IMHO such a container resembles more a set (I'm slowly working on this BTW). So, I guess I'll try to Boost this alone. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo > > Jeff > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
