RE: [boost] Re: Formal Review for Boost I/O Library

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-04 17:22:15

Further to my previous vote for acceptance of this package,
I would like to suggest that the rationale should give some more detail on
WHY this is useful

compared, for example, with

 << '\n' or << "\nAnd More" or const char nl = '\n' or making nl a function
nl().

and WHEN newl and endl should be used.

There was some Boosters discussion on this, and I recollect a addendum paper by
Scott Meyers on the subject but can't trace it.

The post by Dietmar Kuehl was dated 2001-10-19 23:35 PST message

Dietmar noted that

1  newl does reset the width,

2 and is applicable to all kinds of streams.

Are there other reasons for using this, increasing code size, but working
better/quicker?

I also wonder if a multiple newlS would be useful too?

It would also seem sensible to provide Standard ways of doing space and tab
similarly (though with less compelling rationale than newl).

the '\t' and ' ' are not as readable.

For novices  the \n nomenclature is something that could be learned later,
but you can hardly write a "Hello World 2" program without a space and a
newline.

There are increasing numbers of C++ using students who are never going to get
beyond novices - we need to think of them too.

And perhaps there are matching input desiderata?

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Ed Brey
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 5:16 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Re: Formal Review for Boost I/O Library
>
>
> Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> > For those of us who find CVS difficult, a zip of the whole
> > modest-sized package would be more friendly.
>
> Daryle has posted a zip file containing the submission at this URL:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/more_io.zip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>