From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-21 19:26:56
At 04:50 PM 10/21/2003, Ross MacGregor wrote:
>Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>> "The String Algorithm Library provides a generic implementation of
>> string-related algorithms which are missing in STL. It is an extension
>> the algorithms library of STL and it includes trimming, case
>> predicates and find/replace functions.
>On a different note, I suggest moving boost::string_algo to
>boost::algorithm containing boost::algorithm::string.
Yes, sounds like a better organization.
>I have this small mutating algorithm I am considering adding to boost
>(see "Thoughts on partial_random_shuffle" thread) that has generated
>some dicussion on creating a boost::algorithm library.
>Beman Dawes wrote:
> > There are a couple of other algorithm oriented libraries in the
> > boost-sandbox CVS in directories libs/sequence_algo and
> > libs/string_algo. There is also a libs/linear_sort.
> > Perhaps we should have boost/algorithm and libs/algorithm directories.
> > boost/algorithm would could eventually contain headers like
> > partial_random_shuffle.hpp, linear_sort.hpp, and string.hpp.
> > Likewise, libs/algorithm would have sub-directories
> > partial_random_shuffle, linear_sort, and string. Each of these
> > sub-directories would contain the usual doc, example, test
> > Or if the library is really small, just the files themselves.
> > That way we have a coherent organization for smallish algorithm
> > libraries even though development is a separate effort for each
> > --Beman
>The question is how do we proceed with this idea? Can we have a formal
>review for boost::algorithm without any content or just make it an
>suggestion for the current algorithms under review?
We don't normally formal review organizational details. Just make it a
suggestion for the current library.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk