Re: [boost] RFC: Boost.XML API prototype in the sandbox

From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-11 20:00:06

On 7/11/07, Phil Endecott <spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:

[snipped]

> >
> > But you lose locality
>
> Not with literal strings, e.g.
>
> element("<author>"
>            "<firstname>Joe</firstname>"
>            "<surname>Random</surname>"
>          "</author>");

But no syntax checking whatsoever.

> > and sometimes performance.

[snip]

> Well if you're generating an XML fragment with an <author> tag, it
> should mean something to you.  If you prefer, try author_element or element("author").
>
> > then
> >
> > a.push_back()
> > a.push_back()
> > ai.push_back()
>
> I hope that push_back() is familiar to all C++ users.

Have you noted that the first two are a, and the firth is ai ? It is
from your own code.

> > It doesnt strike to you that this code is very error-prone?
>
> The main types of error are creating an element and then forgetting to
> add it to its parent, and stuff like that.  Yes, this happens.  But
> it's fairly easy to debug.

I believe that it is not only very recurring, but there are a lot of
other errors that compiles and fails. Debugging xml generation is a
PITA when the xml logic is quite complex. Some may never be tested.

[snip]

> > What is the advantage of not resorting to operator overloading? What
> > exactly anybody wins not using it?
>
> The advantage of not using operator overloading is that it is easier to
> see what is going on; the code is less magical.  We all know what
> "OBJECT.METHOD(PARAMETER)" does, but what does X [ Y , Z ] do?  It
> looks like 2D array indexing to me.  The overloading of operator[] and
> operator, that David presented would be justified if it made a
> substantial saving in LOC and increase in clarity compared to what you
> could achieve using conventional syntax.  But my feeling (and I'm happy
> to see counter-examples) is that the syntax that I presented gets close
> to the LOC and clarity (see below), and that in some cases you can use
> inline string literals for maximum clarity.

With fear of sounding too hasty, IMO, boost is way beyond this
abstraction prejudice.

[snip]

>
> Phil.

-- 
Felipe Magno de Almeida