Boost logo

Boost :

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-03 10:14:36

 Samuel Krempp wrote:
> > Well, leaving aside my dislike of printf :), I still don't
> > think that allowance of two _so_ different in complexity and
> > error-proneness forms of argument specification is a good
> > decision. IMO, if there is a need for supporting extended
> > printf format, a separate 'pformat' class (and only it)
> > is a much better way to do it.
> I dont think so.
> when only the parsing function differ, I use the same class and have a
> separate parsing function called.
> Having 2 classes is unnecessary code duplication.

You can share as much implementation between two classes as you want to :).
I was just suggesting that we shouldn't support full-fledged printf syntax
in simple 'format' case.


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