Re: [boost] Formal Review Request: Boost.Convert

Subject: Re: [boost] Formal Review Request: Boost.Convert
From: Vladimir.Batov_at_[hidden]
Date: 2009-02-19 17:05:27

I've implemented the functionality as I described (convert as a class) and 
uploaded it as v0.21.

I feel it is a considerable step forward in many respects as now it is 
more of a conversion 'framework' as users can create their specific 
specializations of boost::convert for their specific needs (as I did with 
lexical_cast).

At the same time it feels reconciliatory as fighting over names could be 
put to rest (I hope) as we or the users might write simple and generic 
wrappers to boost::convert. In particular, I added boost::convert_to and 
boost::convert_from. It's just a suggestion. We might decide to keep them 
or remove or rename them. I am not fussy about it. So, the deployment loos 
as follows:

// Explicitly specified 'from' and 'to' types. My personal preference 
int i = boost::convert<string, int>(str, -1);
string s = boost::convert<int, string>(-1, "conversion failed");

// Deduced 'from' type.
int i = boost::convert_to<int>(str);
string s = boost::convert_to<string>(-1);

// Both types are deduced.
int i = boost::convert_from(str, -1);
string s = boost::convert_from(-1, "conversion failed");

Robert suggested renaming 'convert' to 'conversion' but I am not warming 
up to that (yet, you might have noticed I am slow) as I essentially see 
'convert' as a functor, i.e. encapsulating as an action, i.e. a verb is 
more appropriate. For that reason the code itself looks readable (to me) 
as "boost::convert<int, string>" reads as 'convert int to string".

Thanks,
Vladimir.