Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Convert+Boost.Parameter
From: Vladimir Batov (batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-02 22:07:15

> From: "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]>
> Also, for what it's worth, when this discussion moved from simple
> to_string/to_int type functionality into the realm of a "generalized
> conversion framework," I mostly lost interest.
> I haven't been watching closely, so I could be wrong, it seems like a
> classic premature generalization... the same one, in fact, that makes
> lexical_cast unsuitable for many people's purposes. Generic components
> can only properly arise from a survey of many specific, non-generic
> components. Have we done that for this "generalized conversion utility"
> or is the interface being designed speculatively to allow for something
> that maybe nobody wants or needs?

Yes, I have to agree as I've been feeling the same. I read/write a lot of
configuration data and I have to rely on XML for communications. I need/use
string-to/from-type conversions a LOT in the lexical_cast manner. I've never
had the urge of integrating type-to-type conversions into any kind of a
framework as those conversions seem so type-specific that the following
always felt as the natural choice:

    class Some
        Some(Other const&)

That said, I was not sure if my experience was that exemplary so I did not
want to shut the door for such a possibility. I am still hoping that that
fairly neutral interface

    int i = convert<int>::from(str);

does not sacrifice the string-based origins of that whole discussion and at
the same time leaves the door open whatever might come our way... if ever.


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