Re: [boost] Re: Boost.Assert

From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-14 17:14:16

From: <Msk_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "Hendrik Schober" <boost_at_H...> wrote:
> >   Once the "formatting a string"-problem is attacked, 
> >   I'd rather have it solving the "do the same with 
> >   respect to i18", in order to make it more usefull 
> >   in general. The problem with other languages is 
> >   that it might change word and argument orderings. 
> >   With the above that's hard to do. 
> >   We use a scheme which allows to do this: 
> >    "A message with @(arg #1) and @(another arg)." 
> >   You pass two arguments, one is named "arg #1", the 
> >   other "another arg". We use this for exceptions
> >     file://NotFound: "@(type) @(key) was not found"
> >     throw XFileSpecError( ORIGIN_HERE, CMessage(NotFound)
> >                         + buildNamedParameter("type","folder")
> >                         + buildNamedParameter("key",filespec) );
> >   as well as for logging: 
> >     LogMsg( ORIGIN_HERE, 
> >             "Object allocated @@@(this), about to call @(foo())...", 
> >             ERROR_PAR(this)+ERROR_PAR(foo()) );
> 
> I hadn't even thought about internationalization.
> For strings that are intended for asserts or exceptions,
> that would seem to be overkill.  These strings are
> like comments, in the sense that they are only intended
> to be seen by the programmer - and we normally include
> comments in only a single language.  Also, I don't
> believe that std::exception::what() will handle 21-bit
> unicode.

It handles multi-byte encoded character strings, but whether
those support some verson of Unicode is implementation-
defined.