SOURCE *What is your evaluation of the design?

Very good.

* What is your evaluation of the implementation?

Also, very good.

* What is your evaluation of the documentation?

I thought the documentation was comparable
in quality to the best documented libraries in boost.

* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

As others have indicated, there is some overlap with other boost libraries.
However, the emphasis of xpressive is different and
somewhat more flexible.

* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
problems?

GCC 3.2. No problems.

* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?

I've incorporated xpressive into a couple of small console applications. At
first, I
spent maybe 2 hours reading the documents and probably one hour to implement
an
xpressive solution. Since that time, I have read the documentation for an
additional couple hours for more background.


* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Yes. As a user of boost::regex and boost::spirit.

* Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?

Yes, without reservation.

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