www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Next in the Review Queue?

reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
The review for the region allocator has completed, so we need to choos 
something else to review now. I believe that the current items in the review 
queue which are ready for review are

- std.log
- a CSV parsing module by Jesse Phillips
- std.benchmark
- GSoC changes to std.regex

There are a couple of other items which are in a "pre-review" state (e.g. 
orange) as well as a few others that are supposed to be close to being ready 
for review (e.g. changes to std.variant), but I'm not aware of anything else 
which is actually ready for review at the moment. So, if I missed something, 
please bring it up.

The item which has been in the queue the longest is std.log, but given that 
std.benchmark could affect further reviews, we may want to review that first. 
The GSoC changes to to std.regex are also probably of fairly high priority.

Any thoughts on which item should be reviewed first?

- Jonathan M Davis
Oct 02 2011
next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 10/3/11 1:27 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 The review for the region allocator has completed, so we need to choos
 something else to review now. I believe that the current items in the review
 queue which are ready for review are

 - std.log
 - a CSV parsing module by Jesse Phillips
 - std.benchmark
 - GSoC changes to std.regex

 There are a couple of other items which are in a "pre-review" state (e.g.
 orange) as well as a few others that are supposed to be close to being ready
 for review (e.g. changes to std.variant), but I'm not aware of anything else
 which is actually ready for review at the moment. So, if I missed something,
 please bring it up.

 The item which has been in the queue the longest is std.log, but given that
 std.benchmark could affect further reviews, we may want to review that first.
 The GSoC changes to to std.regex are also probably of fairly high priority.

Following feedback I received for std.benchmark I'd like to take a little more time to improve it. Should be ready for formal review next Monday. Thanks, Andrei
Oct 03 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Jonathan M Davis Wrote:

 The review for the region allocator has completed, so we need to choos 
 something else to review now. I believe that the current items in the review 
 queue which are ready for review are
 
 - std.log
 - a CSV parsing module by Jesse Phillips
 - std.benchmark
 - GSoC changes to std.regex
 
 There are a couple of other items which are in a "pre-review" state (e.g. 
 orange) as well as a few others that are supposed to be close to being ready 
 for review (e.g. changes to std.variant), but I'm not aware of anything else 
 which is actually ready for review at the moment. So, if I missed something, 
 please bring it up.
 
 The item which has been in the queue the longest is std.log, but given that 
 std.benchmark could affect further reviews, we may want to review that first. 
 The GSoC changes to to std.regex are also probably of fairly high priority.
 
 Any thoughts on which item should be reviewed first?
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

While I would love to have mine reviewed, I agree with your selection of priority.
Oct 03 2011
parent reply Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
On 03.10.2011 21:01, Jesse Phillips wrote:
 Jonathan M Davis Wrote:

 The review for the region allocator has completed, so we need to choos
 something else to review now. I believe that the current items in the review
 queue which are ready for review are

 - std.log
 - a CSV parsing module by Jesse Phillips
 - std.benchmark
 - GSoC changes to std.regex

 There are a couple of other items which are in a "pre-review" state (e.g.
 orange) as well as a few others that are supposed to be close to being ready
 for review (e.g. changes to std.variant), but I'm not aware of anything else
 which is actually ready for review at the moment. So, if I missed something,
 please bring it up.

 The item which has been in the queue the longest is std.log, but given that
 std.benchmark could affect further reviews, we may want to review that first.
 The GSoC changes to to std.regex are also probably of fairly high priority.

 Any thoughts on which item should be reviewed first?

 - Jonathan M Davis

While I would love to have mine reviewed, I agree with your selection of priority.

Same thoughts here. As for std.regex being high priority, well, others have being waiting for quite some time so let's respect order unless someone wants to skip a round. -- Dmitry Olshansky
Oct 03 2011
parent simendsjo <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On 03.10.2011 22:14, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
 On 03.10.2011 21:01, Jesse Phillips wrote:
 Jonathan M Davis Wrote:

 The review for the region allocator has completed, so we need to choos
 something else to review now. I believe that the current items in the
 review
 queue which are ready for review are

 - std.log
 - a CSV parsing module by Jesse Phillips
 - std.benchmark
 - GSoC changes to std.regex

 There are a couple of other items which are in a "pre-review" state
 (e.g.
 orange) as well as a few others that are supposed to be close to
 being ready
 for review (e.g. changes to std.variant), but I'm not aware of
 anything else
 which is actually ready for review at the moment. So, if I missed
 something,
 please bring it up.

 The item which has been in the queue the longest is std.log, but
 given that
 std.benchmark could affect further reviews, we may want to review
 that first.
 The GSoC changes to to std.regex are also probably of fairly high
 priority.

 Any thoughts on which item should be reviewed first?

 - Jonathan M Davis

While I would love to have mine reviewed, I agree with your selection of priority.

Same thoughts here. As for std.regex being high priority, well, others have being waiting for quite some time so let's respect order unless someone wants to skip a round.

Isn't there more in the queue? std.process and std.socket rewrite? Couldn't find a list in the wiki though.
Oct 03 2011
prev sibling parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Monday, October 03, 2011 13:30 simendsjo wrote:
 Isn't there more in the queue? std.process and std.socket rewrite?

IIUC, the new std.process requires a fix to dmc's C runtime on Windows, so until that's sorted out, the new std.process is not ready for review. As for std.socket, https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/260 does do a fair bit of work on it, but as I understand it, it doesn't change enough of the API to merit a formal review (I haven't looked over that particular pull request in detail though - just prior versions of it - so I'm not all that clear on its current state). And I'm not aware of any major redesigns of std.socket being in the works - though there has been some discussion of possibly redesigning its current API. Regardless, no major revisions to std.socket have been submitted as ready for the review queue.
 Couldn't find a list in the wiki though.

There isn't a formal list for the review queue anywhere. It's managed entirely by posts in the newsgroup. It's being managed fairly informally at this point, since we don't always review the item that's been in the queue the longest (depending on the current circumstances), and unless the person who's submitting a module for review is active on the newsgroup and ready to be active in the review of their code, there's no point in reviewing their code anyway. And as long as that works, we're going to continue to do it that way. - Jonathan M Davis
Oct 03 2011
parent Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Jonathan M Davis Wrote:

 There isn't a formal list for the review queue anywhere. It's managed entirely 
 by posts in the newsgroup. It's being managed fairly informally at this point, 
 since we don't always review the item that's been in the queue the longest 
 (depending on the current circumstances), and unless the person who's 
 submitting a module for review is active on the newsgroup and ready to be 
 active in the review of their code, there's no point in reviewing their code 
 anyway. And as long as that works, we're going to continue to do it that way.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

In fact, I'm thinking that these threads should come up periodically but not include a list. Instead just ask what is ready for review. The reason are two fold. 1. As you say the author must be active, and while they may usually be active you want them active now. 2. It forces the author to speak to their being active/not on vacation. I wasn't sure if it made sense to reply, but it does. I suppose it could be a little discouraging, "they keep forgetting about me! I've been ready the last 3..." kind of response. But I don't think anyone here would take it that way, and considering the Boost review criteria, once the code is in it is it is "your" responsibility including passing the baton. So sticking around for review isn't any different from having it in.
Oct 03 2011