From: Samuel Krempp (krempp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-23 13:24:34
On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 18:21, Karl Nelson wrote:
> I sent the solution to that problem. You define the manipulators as
> shown in ...
Yes, I have read your messages, and I think it's a good idea to make
a common frame for all manipulators, instead of the std
manipulators that are of unknown types.
> format(str) % 1 % boost::io::width(10) % 2;
Notice this would not interfere with a 'manip' function, that
encapsulates whatever you pass it into a 'manip_wrapper'
If the iomanip templates you propose are accepted, we will add
an overload to operator% to enable the example above.
But a manip function would still be useful, for instance if you want to
use custom manipulators, or manipulators coming from a third-party
So even with iomanip<T>, an explicit way of passing manipulators can
still be useful.
I think the iomanip would make a useful library. (I'm sending a reply to
your initial message of January 6. Late is better than never.. :-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk