Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeff Flinn (TriumphSprint2000_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-14 07:28:18

"Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote in message


> xpressive's design goals led to a different interface and a different
> internal representation for the regex type. The interface chosen by
> Boost.Regex places some requirements on the implementation -- namely,
> that the compiled form of a regex much be iterator-neutral. xpressive's
> implementation is a poor fit for the Boost.Regex interface. IMO, it's
> best to leave Boost.Regex alone. Its implementation is a far better fit
> for its interface than xpressive would be.

That begs the question: do we need Boost.Regex's interface? I'm not up to
date on Boost.Regex's status as far as TR1, so maybe it's a done deal
already. But it seems to me that xpressive has a broader application domain,
and may be a better candidate?

I stopped using Boost.Regex after I invested the time to learn Spirit. Not
that there was anything wrong with Boost.Regex. I just started to think in
terms of Spirit grammars and functor parsers. My programming productivity
seems to be bound by my memory limitations. So I try to utilize a learned
technology as often as I can to keep up on the nuances of the tool.

Jeff Flinn

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