[boost] Re: FORMAL review of "Output Formatters" - results

From: Hubert Holin (Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-25 07:25:35

Somewhere in the E.U., le 25/10/2004

   Bonjour

In article <41795193.2000906_at_[hidden]>,
 John Torjo <john.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> > 
> >       I just wanted to point out that the reason I was interested in it 
> > is that I had been told (when it was in the sandbox, quite some time 
> > before the review) it had the potential to help me simplify tremendously 
> > my quaternion and, especially, octonion libraries, by providing a better 
> > handling of input operators. So I would say (better late than never, 
> > though perhaps it is now *too* late) that there actually *is* an 
> > interest in input facilities.
> > 
> 
> can't [serialize] do that?
> 
> Best,
> John

      It is not immediately clear if [serialize] can do that in any way 
which is simpler to implement than what I already do for these classes 
(i.e. it would likely be as disgusting and unmaintainable, however 
necessary).

      The "out"put Formatter library, however, seemed to be able to 
process a structured list (with possible shortened forms) with minimal 
hassle. For instance, I want to accept "(1, 2)", "(1, 2, 3, 4)" and 
"((1, 2), (3, 4))" as valid quaternions but not "((1, 2), 3, 4)" (quotes 
to help in the reading of the text, not part of the syntax). My initial 
idea was to use Spririt to build a formal description of the format, but 
that would have been overkill if a more lightweight library such as 
"out"put Formatters had been available (and provided it did actually fit 
the bill, which I *still* did not manage to find the time to test :-<   
).

   Cordialement

         Hubert Holin