Boost logo

Boost :

From: Cory Nelson (phrosty_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-30 07:51:25

On 10/30/06, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> > (And I agree, validation should be handled independently, so users don't
> > have to pay for things they don't use.)
> >
> Little detail: the XML specification actually requires that validation
> is at user discretion.
> I plan to implement it as a filter. But even then it must always be
> present: the spec requires quite a few things from it.

As it is right now, I'd prefer using #1. I am interested in seeing a
basic example (in code) of how using your #3 would work.

If it is #1, it would be trivial to make a validating_reader that
inherits from the basic reader and only wraps next().

> Sebastian Redl
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

Cory Nelson

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