Re: [boost] Re: Any interest for a parser class?

From: joel de guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-18 10:11:27

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stewart, Robert" :

> would need to be exposed. You've pointed out that there is a dependency on
> tuples in spirit_fwd.hpp, so there is, indeed, significant, though not
> egregious, overhead with this approach.

Actually, there's no hard dependency at all. It's trivial to decouple tuples
from the forward headers. This will be done. Nevertheless...

I reassert my position: You can hide the Spirit specific side of the equation.
In fact an implementation can decouple the implementation 100% such
that the API will not depend directly nor indirectly on **any** libraries at all, not 
even std. That *is* a quality of implementation issue. That's not Spirit's problem.

> On a different note, you've complained about Spirit's portability. This is
> always a concern, but portability of Boost is often a problem and requires
> not insignificant effort to resolve. Perhaps your compilers are among those
> not well supported. That doesn't mean Spirit is not portable. (I think you
> mentioned using MSVC5. If so, you can hardly blame your compilation problems
> on Spirit. MSVC6 is much better, even while widely missing the mark of
> standard compliance.) Nevertheless, these portability issues can be
> resolved, in the general case, so don't dwell on them too much.

V1.1 is ok with MSVC6. It has enough smarts to do simple CLA parsing, IMO.

Regards,
--Joel