From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-03 19:08:29
William E. Kempf wrote:
> I don't want to discourage you... in fact, I'd like to do the opposite. I
> just haven't had the time to look at what you have so far to give any
> helpful criticism, other than to emphasise that Boost discourages tight
> coupling to libraries other than Boost or the standard libraries. This
> doesn't mean that you have to provide a full implementation of the back
> end parser as a Boost submission (though I do think that would be an
> interesting submission in and of itself), only that you need to convince
> people that you aren't tied to some other library.
ok, whoever is interested: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/xml/
contains my current working code (or almost), with some examples. As
I said, it's based on libxml2, so the Makefiles rely on it.
The demos use std::string as string class, but I'v already used QString
(from the Qt GUI toolkit) successfully as a unicode-enabled alternative.
Comments and suggestions are most welcome,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk