RE: [boost] Formal review of "Output Formatters" library begins today

From: Reece Dunn (msclrhd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-13 12:27:34

Paul A Bristow wrote:
>* There is a terribly central spelling mistake which nobody seems to noted
>so far:
>
>   A _delimiter_ does de-limit things and has nothing to do with deli_s or
>meter_s!
>   A global search in replace in code and docs is vital.

<blush>

>* I strongly dislike abbreviations and concatenations. It is MUCH easier to
>read/understand and consistent with STL styling to use full words and _s, 
>if
>a bit longer to type. naryfmt really must qualify for some prize.
>nary_format or n_ary_format.
>   "Boost prefers clarity to curtness".

I have been giving this some thought. What I am looking at at the moment is 
something like:

   std::pair
   <
      std::pair< int, std::vector< char > >,
      std::list< boost::math::quaternion< float > >
   > mct;

   namespace io  = boost::io;
   namespace fmt = boost::io::format;

   std::cout << io::object( mct,
      fmt::pair
      (
         fmt::pair( fmt::basic(), fmt::container()),
         fmt::container( fmt::nary())
      )
   );

With io::delimiter holding one of the delimiter values. 
io::wrapped_delimiter will replace io::openclose_formatter in holding 
open/close delimiter pairs and io::sequence_delimiter replaces 
io::formatter.

>| 3. What is your evaluation of the documentation?  OK -
>
>   Though I am not a fan of background coloured boxes for code - I think 
>the
>font change is enough.
>
>   One thing I would REALLY REALLY like is a Boost 'Standard' way of
>colouring and indenting code similar to Visual Studio IDE - though I don't
>feel their colour scheme is quite as good mine!

What do you think about the new Boost.quickdoc? The docs for quickbook are 
available at http://tinyurl.com/64el7, and the source is at 
http://tinyurl.com/4tdjj. Thanks to Eric and Joel for this great tool.

>| 8. Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?   Yes 
>-
>but with some name changes.

See above.

>And I would like to see active work by all authors to ensure that this
>interacts with the filtering, range, more_io libraries before the first
>actual full release (in 1.33?) so that the documentation cross-references
>too, including examples of combinations of these techniques.

I am willing to co-operate.

>I can understand that authors are unwilling/unable to work together until
>they are sure which other libraries can be assumed a part of Boost, and I
>think we must accept (and flag up) that there will probably be changes,
>perhaps major, while interworking is perfected.  The three recent IO
>contributions, with serialisation, are prime candidates for mutual
>refinement.

Sure.

Regards,
Reece

_________________________________________________________________
Want to block unwanted pop-ups? Download the free MSN Toolbar now!  
http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/