Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (John_Maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-24 05:35:47


>The alternative I had in mind is to implement the | & ^ bitwise operators
>for regbase::flag_type.

I know, but changing the type to unsigned int is easier :-)

BTW what happens if you OR together two enum values (note that the result
will not be a valid enum)? Just curious...

>Is it really so inconvenient to use "back_inserter(c)" instead
>of "c" in the caller?

The more I think about it, no, it probably isn't, it would allow insertion
into std::set as well (via a custom iterator) which would be useful under
some curcumstances (think scanning html for URL's - we don't want
duplicates in placed in the container). So lets go with this.

>And, as mentioned above, while implementing bad_pattern::what(),
>you hit compiler breakage. Wouldn't it be so much easier with a
>destructor? The destructor is virtual as well, so your DLL issues
>should be solved.

Yes I'll go with the destructor, sorry I should have made that clear.

>We had some stream-based one-function-call string-to-T converter nearly
>ready for submission a few weeks ago ("stream_convert" or somesuch).
>What has happened to it, btw.?

I've posted a separate message about this.

>I'm a bit less miserable with toi() instead of the implicit casts, but
>I'm definitely not happy :-(

OK, I admit to having tongue in cheek there :-)
I'll leave this change to last, and in the mean time maybe lexical_cast can
be brushed off, dusted down and submitted for review - if there are
outstanding issues with lexical_cast I don't mind helping out with code or
whatever BTW.

- John.

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