RE: [boost] format input/output

From: Stewart, Robert (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-23 14:49:16

From:	Samuel Krempp [SMTP:krempp_at_[hidden]]
> 
> On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 10:34, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> 
> about 'format' not expliciting it is only output oriented, well, it's
> true the name is not as explicit as 'printf'.
> 
> But it won't be a problem for later finding a name for a formatted input
> library, one can forge the name from 'parser', or the like.
[snip]
> Even if input and output could share the same style of usage, the 2
> aspects should not be implemented in the same class, so the 2 classes
> would need distinct names.

Absolutely.

> format / parse, or input, or reader, .. 
> 
> One thing I believe, is that the name 'format' fits ouput better than
> input, and that the Boost.Format library has the right to take it !

Why not simply "iformat" and "oformat?"  This follows the istream/ostream
precedent. Clearly, at this time, we have only "oformat," but why not allow
for "iformat," should it come along?

Rob
Susquehanna International Group, LLP
http://www.sig.com