Boost logo

Boost :

From: Rozental, Gennadiy (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-21 12:15:08


I would like to start with resolution. I vote NOT to accept this submission.

Here some more details:

> 1. What is your evaluation of the design?

Library trying to solve in fact trivial problem. Would it be presented as
trivial function

Template<typename C>
Foo( C const& c, std::string open, std::string close, std::string sep );

I may understand it.

As to presented design - I see it as unnecessary complicated. And in many
cases simply incorrect.
Library does not follow standard practice as to wide char support.
Interfaces seem confusing and error prone.
Decoration model seems too simple to warrant so much trouble as reusable
library. Maybe more powerful/flexible solution should be considered.

> 2. What is your evaluation of the implementation?

In most part I either don't understand or don't like it. IMO simple task
library trying to solve shouldn't require that much code. Simple overloading
base solution should've done the trick.

> 3. What is your evaluation of the documentation?

Did not get to this stage.

> 4. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

Now to the most important: why would I ever want to use library like this?

We have already:

In what scenario I would use this library?
I most definitely wouldn't want to repeat all this formatting every time I
need to output my vector.
If I write output operation rarely - I would use explicit loop -it's more
flexible anyway.
If I write output operation frequently - I would separate in function and
here again would use explicit loop for the same reasons.
If I write many output functions like above - I would write wrapper function
like in 1. And it will work for most collections.

I wouldn't use this library for filtering - we will have iostreams library
for that (If I am not mistaken).
I wouldn't use this library for XML printing - why would I want to mention
tag name twice?


> 5. Did you try to use the library?

Did not get to this stage.

> 6. How much effort did you put into your evaluation?

A quick In-depth study.

> 7. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

That's the main issue - I do not see problem domain.



Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at