Subject: [boost] [convert] Review
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-26 14:58:33
Following is my review of the convert library proposed by Vladimir
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
I think the design is not good.
After having read through the documentation, I think that the API is too
The use of operator>> feels misplaced. From the documentation it is not really
clear what the relation between the target type, the nested result and the
converter function object is.
Additionally, the rational behind the non-throwing version isn't very clear to
me. It feels like a step backwards: Weren't explicitly returned error codes
obsoleted by exceptions?
Moreover, I don't get how the design really is superior to boost::lexical_cast,
and why it couldn't been implemented as an extension to that library.
The use of this converter function object looks like a nice concept at first
sight but, as mentioned above, in the end, probably adds more confusion and
problems than anything else.
I don't think that having everything hidden behind this static from function is
wise and should be rethought. Different functions, for different purposes would
be better suited.
> - What is your evaluation of the implementation?
Didn't take a look at the implementation.
> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
The overall documentation is Okayish. There are some minor typos and misplaced
words. Proofreading it again should fix this.
What is std::u8string?
The reference section feels like a bad joke. It is incomplete and doesn't really
After reading through the documentation I got the feeling that the library is
incomplete and not really finished yet. Almost any feature is experimental. One
feature is mentioned but not really documented: The extension of the converter.
> - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
There is no doubt that the features implemented in the library are useful.
> - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
Didn't try to use it.
> - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
> reading? In-depth study?
Read through the documentation.
> - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
> And finally:
> Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
No. I second that it feels more like a extension to boost::lexical_cast than
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk