Boost logo

Boost :

From: Darin Adler (darin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-22 13:05:53

on 8/21/00 3:41 PM, Karl Nelson at kenelson_at_[hidden] wrote:

My opinions on the questions Karl asked:

> stream/manipulator like versus function like

I prefer the manipulator style.

I love Dave Abrahams's proposed way of handling the string vs. stream
contexts. If we don't go that way, string_format is the name I'd chose. I
really want to see Karl's "return" of Dave's last API "volley". I think we
are close to something really nice here.

> Unix 98 printf specification versus creating our own format

Something like printf seems good, since the printf format is widely known. I
like Karl's first cut (not surprising since he and I discussed it briefly a
month or two ago).

> simple positional versus handles formating

It's nice to have some formatting, I think. But for me, this one is really
driven more by the previous criterion ("be like printf").

> full charT versus just a ostream and wostream version

I thing doing the full charT thing is a good idea, as long as it doesn't
somehow make the whole implementation too tricky and sink the whole thing.
This makes it much more likely to get into a future C++ library standard,
for one thing.

    -- Darin

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at