Skip to content

Boost.MSM 1.91 release notes#604

Merged
PeterTurcan merged 1 commit intoboostorg:developfrom
chandryan:msm-1.91-release-notes
Feb 24, 2026
Merged

Boost.MSM 1.91 release notes#604
PeterTurcan merged 1 commit intoboostorg:developfrom
chandryan:msm-1.91-release-notes

Conversation

@chandryan
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@cppalliance-bot
Copy link

cppalliance-bot commented Feb 24, 2026

An automated preview of the documentation is available at https://604.site-docs.prtest2.cppalliance.org/index.html

If more commits are pushed to the pull request, the docs will rebuild at the same URL.

2026-02-24 21:09:13 UTC

Copy link
Collaborator

@PeterTurcan PeterTurcan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you verify the first three New features are the top priority?

Change "&" to "and" to be consistent.

Small Object Optimization should probably be lower case - Small object optimization, unless it is a name.

Should functor, on_entry() and on_exit(0 be in *** backticks as they are code syntax? Same for public and protected maybe.

Undefined Behavior should be lower case.

Perhaps spell out FSM unless its meaning is well known?

@chandryan chandryan force-pushed the msm-1.91-release-notes branch from 21355af to 35f2110 Compare February 24, 2026 21:04
@chandryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

chandryan commented Feb 24, 2026

Thank you for the feedback and suggestions; I appreciate them. As a non-native speaker with limited experience writing technical documentation, I’ve recently realized there is still much to learn :)

Can you verify the first three New features are the top priority?

Good point, I had not thought about priorities. I've updated the list accordingly.

Change "&" to "and" to be consistent.

Changed to use "and" consistently.

Small Object Optimization should probably be lower case - Small object optimization, unless it is a name.

Changed to lower case.

Should functor, on_entry() and on_exit(0 be in *** backticks as they are code syntax? Same for public and protected maybe.

I changed the APIs to on_entry(...) and on_exit(...) to more closely resmble their actual syntax. Since they have template parameters which are difficult to describe inline, I omitted the full signatures because they do not provide additional useful context.

I also marked the accessors public and protected accordingly.

I left “functor” unchanged, as it does not directly relate to code syntax.

Undefined Behavior should be lower case.

Changed as suggested.

Perhaps spell out FSM unless its meaning is well known?

This refers to one of the template parameters of the mentioned calls. I believe it is well known to readers familiar with MSM. I added backticks to indicate that it reflects code syntax.

@PeterTurcan PeterTurcan merged commit d39c29f into boostorg:develop Feb 24, 2026
4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants