From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-24 18:14:31
Greer, Joe wrote:
> Performing the data formatting in the string class means the I/O library wouldn't have to care about Unicode issues.
I'm afraid that's not true. The I/O library has to care about Unicode
(and general character encoding) if it wants to handle text without
placing the entire burden of making the text suitable for I/O (i.e.
writing it to a file) on the programmer.
On the other hand, the I/O library doesn't need to care about any
Unicode issues beyond simple encoding/decoding for simple text transport.
Formatting doesn't have to care too much, either (for example, collating
is not interesting to generic formatting), and anyway, it'll be very
I have written at length in another post on why I think formatting
should be based on the I/O interfaces.
> though I prefer the specifiers from C# to the specifiers actually used by boost format. C# also allows custom formatters to be created and used and I like that idea.
I like the idea, too, but I studied the C# a bit and don't like the way
they're doing it. I cannot make head nor tails from the three involved
interfaces (ITextFormatter, IFormattable, IFormatProvider), but it
doesn't sound that flexible to me.
However, it gave me some ideas. I hope to be able to present them to the
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk