Subject: Re: [boost] construe_cast, call for interest and feedback
From: PB (newbarker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-09 13:04:44
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Jeroen Habraken <vexocide_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 9 October 2010 14:50, Mathias Gaunard <mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 09/10/2010 13:42, PB wrote:
>>> Rather than introducing another casting method, could lexical_cast be
>>> reworked internally to build upon Spirit? That way previous
>>> investments in lexical_cast will just work faster with no changes,
>>> Also, I won't need to stop and think which one I should be using.
>> The problem is that lexical_cast is a bit different since it takes into
>> account C++ locales.
> Yes, this was bound to be brought up. There is no way I can implement
> them, not in the short run anyways, yet I don't believe this to be a
> major problem as locales are slow. The library is designed to be
> extensible and if you want numbers to be formatted in a specific way,
> this should be possible.
I now understand a bit more the difference between lexical_cast and
construe_cast and agree with Vincente that it'd be good to have the
choice between runtime/compile improvements.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk