From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-03 09:52:35
William E. Kempf wrote:
>> I tend to disagree here. Writing XML library is not easy, and libraries
>> like expat and libxml2 are already here, working and debugged. The
>> effort to write a new library from scratch would be quite serious, and
>> will result in anything tangible only after a lot of time. Unless
>> somebody has really lot of spare time, wrapping existing library is the
>> only way how XML support can be added in boost.
> Careful with what you disagree with. I stated that it would still be nice
> to have a Boost supplied backend, but I didn't state this was a
> requirement. What I think *is* a requirement is that any wrapper library
> not be tied to a single backend, and I personally believe that what
> follows from that is that the submission must have at least 2 referenced
> backends for proof of concept. Note that this is precisely what
> Boost.Threads does, for instance.
Oh.. I misread your post. Apologies. Still, from a practical point of view
I can hardly imagine that if libxml2 wrapper works, somebody will take the
time to plug in another backend. That would mean rewriting all/most
implementation method and will bring no end user value --- so it's not
sufficiently interesting task to anybody to take.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk