Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-23 18:03:40
On 03/23/2010 05:58 PM, Tom Brinkman wrote:
>> Iostream may be preferable for purely academic reasons, but for practical
>>> reason, "printf"
>>> is the api style that is universally adopted.
>>>> Iostream stry is safe. I have worked on a lot of projects having a lot
>> of bug in printf like functions on site. I prefer the compiler give me these
>> kind of errors for safety purposes.
> Its not about what you and i prefer. Its all about what is the prevailing
> standard. Popular techniques are developed over many years. Printf is a
> popular technique that C++ libraries should continue to support. No reason
> to abandon it.
I'm not quite sure I understand the issue here. In what way does boost
not "support" printf ?
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk