Re: [boost] Boost.Locale (was Re: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Locale (was Re: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-15 07:21:35

On 15/12/2010 01:44, Edward Diener wrote:
> On 12/14/2010 6:04 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>> On 14/12/2010 22:01, Edward Diener wrote:
>>
>>> What is Your library called and where in the sandbox is it ?
>>
>> Boost.Unicode, it's in soc/2009.
>
> Maybe the lack of interest is because this means little to me, and may
> mean little to others. If you have a library you need to tell people how
> to get it. I found a Soc 2009 home page and I still have no idea how one
> is supposed to see what is there or how to get your library.

There have been emails about it regularly on this mailing list for the 
past year and a half.

Searching this list for Unicode should give you many hits.
The docs are here, if that's what you're looking for:
<http://mathias.gaunard.com/unicode/doc/html/>

> Very strange. You mention your library as possibly being more complete
> but then you tout someone else's. OK, I will study Artyom's Boost.Locale
> instead.

My library is more powerful in a way, but is also less polished and 
feature-complete.
They also have completely different approaches in their interface, as my 
library is made to be locale-agnostic and Artyom's chooses to make use 
of the standard C++ locale subsystem as much as possible, even though it 
is inherently broken for Unicode.

My library is a generic implementation of Unicode, while Boost.Locale is 
mostly a wrapper on top of ICU, IBM's Unicode library.

They're quite different, and I like mine best of course, but I have to 
admit Boost.Locale is more ready for production than Boost.Unicode for 
the time being.