Re: [boost] [Review] xpressive

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-14 20:10:13

Scott Woods wrote:

> 4. C++ operators and RE operators are not really comfortable
> bed-fellows. While the operator overloading technique has given
> something useful and concise was there no flirtation with "key words"
> (i.e. in the manner of "as_xpr"). "+" could have been "one_or_more( xpr )".

Again, we've had this discussion before. You might want to look
at the archives when Spirit was being reviewed. I'm glad Eric chose
to follow existing practice. Doing otherwise would have resulted
in difficulties in unification with Spirit. I can assure you,
after a while, it grows on you and it becomes natural. WRT Spirit,
no one's complaining now. We're way past that initial syntax hurdle.
And I'm glad. Check out a fairly complex Spirit grammar, say, the
Wave CPP. Replace all '+' with 'one_or_more'. You'll see what I
mean.

Cheers,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net