From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-26 09:53:28
> > But you don't write library, put a seal on it, and stop. There's nothing
> > with making it more flexible when users demand it. As it stands, only few
> > persons are interested in the simplest facilities. Is it worth spending
> > time
> > on completely generic/flexible solution if no-one has expressed desire
> > for it?
> Right, again. What do you think of the Boost.Tuple approach?
It's sensible. OTOH, it's limited for one type, which is simpler.
> >1. Operators use fixed format: bracked list with commas between values for
> > vector, for example.
> >2. Manipulators are provided to set brackets and separators.
> >I had implemented the second approach some time ago, but it turned out
> > that was overkill. So, 1) looks better now.
> Boost.Tuple uses the second approach, and it seems it can be useful to
> provide the possibility to change the separators. It's still a quite simple
As I've said previously, your solution appears simple enough to me, so I've no
problem with that kind of flexibily. The only issues are
1. How to specify formatting style for all vectors, or for all sets, etc.
2. How to handle nested containers.
I'll get to this in another email.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk