RE: [boost] Re: I/O library status

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-03 12:11:08

I agree with these conclusions and strongly support the addition of newl.

Paul

Paul A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]   Mobile [phone]
Mobile mailto:pabristow_at_[hidden]
mailto:pbristow_at_[hidden]

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Thomas Witt
| Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 8:19 AM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: Re: [boost] Re: I/O library status
|
|
|
| Hi,
|
| On Monday 02 June 2003 19:21, Ed Brey wrote:
| > * newl differs from '\n' only in that newl doesn't perform background
| > formatting.  Presumably one would choose to use newl to avoid the
| > formatting.  What is undesirable about '\n' being formatted?
|
| To me there are basically two reasons that make newl desirable beside the
| formatting issue.
|
| 1. std::endl was and is still abused heavily. I think there is a reason for
| this. Most c++ programmers are taught to stay clear of ugly low-level c
| things and to use the new shiny c++ facilities instead. And that's what they
| do, replace '\n' with std::endl. Personally I believe this reason alone
| justifies a std library extension std::newl.
|
| 2. IIUC the difference between a character and a manipulator is that the
| manipulator is not tied to the streams character type. So for some
| applications '\n' does not suffice. To me stream.widen('\n') is sufficiently
| ugly to justify a newl modifier.
|
| Thomas
|
| --
| Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Witt
| Institut fuer Verkehrswesen, Eisenbahnbau und -betrieb, Universitaet Hannover
| voice: [phone] - 4273, fax: [phone]
| http://www.ive.uni-hannover.de
|
| _______________________________________________
| Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
|
|