[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       boost
Subject:    [boost] [epochs] Strict vs. lax mode and epoch assignment reports
From:       Joaquin_M_López_Muñoz_via_Boost <boost () lists ! boost ! org>
Date:       2020-06-13 9:59:19
Message-ID: afa8a5ab-0f9d-09ad-fb11-509f520ee08c () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

For those interested in the epoch proposal:

* I've included a discussion on an alternative set of rules for epoch 
assignment dubbed
"lax mode":

https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch#strict-vs-lax-mode

This mode is somewhat more comprehensive that the original, strict mode, 
in the
sense that more libs would progress to higher epochs. Comments welcome 
on which
mode fulfills best the goals of the proposal.

* I've written a utility to automate epoch assignment from a core set of 
human-decided
lib rejections:

   * Strict mode: 
https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/epoch_report.md
   * Lax mode: 
https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/lax_epoch_report.md

These are illustrative examples pretty much dependent on what libs are 
determined to be
subsumed by the C++ standard or more modern Boost libs. You can try 
modifying
this 
(https://github.com/joaquintides/boost_epoch/blob/master/epoch_report/boostepochban.1.73.0.json 
)
and running the epoch report tool to see the results.

Best,

Joaquín M López Muñoz


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]