From: Boris (boriss_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 18:34:38
Marcin Kalicinski wrote:
> [...] The biggest value of property_tree is in its easy to use interface,
> that should not be compromised, if at all possible. I have been
> already reassured in this view by quite many people who took their
> time to review the library.
I was trying to see the big picture: I rather prefer a C++ standard based on
a few well-known concepts like containers, iterators, algorithms etc.
instead of having a C++ standard with hundreds of components which are
tailored for specific needs, collaborate with only a handful of other
components and think they provide an easy-to-use interface while all the
easy-to-use interfaces make the whole standard less easy-to-use.
That said I have used your property tree library myself to read and write a
configuration file. It was indeed very easy to use. However it would have
been even easier if it was something I had known before like eg. an
iterator. For now I will definitely use your property tree library but would
appreciate if existing concepts were reused many C++ developers are familiar
with. My opinion is that your library should be a part of Boost but should
be more generalized in the future.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk