From: Darin Adler (darin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-11 15:17:39
It seems that Boost participants have two kinds of desires for a formatting
A) Those who work in a world where printf format strings are a standard
are looking for a way to use printf format strings in type safe C++ code. I
think that a mechanism compatible with printf that does not have any
significant extensions would be highly valuable.
B) Others are trying to define a new format language that can be used
instead of the printf format strings.
I think that both of these things would be valuable. But I think that
defining a new language is quite difficult. So I think we should do A first.
It's also clear that the best syntax for A would be the same as C printf
format("%s %d", str, i);
There's no need to get into operator overloading, with one small exception.
To avoid having a fixed size limit on the number of parameters, we need some
kind of way to provide additional parameters. I think that either the
"operator ()" or the ".with()" proposal would be fine.
I don't think that the desire for a new formatting language should prevent
us from creating a typesafe implementation of printf. The use of this for
porting code from C alone would seem to justify it, let alone the other
arguments (programmers familiar with it, format language already defined in
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk