Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Locale (was Re: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)
From: Artyom (artyomtnk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-15 13:50:46
> > 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
> 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++
> as much as possible, even though it is inherently broken for Unicode.
Few notes, std::locale is not "inherently broken" it has a great way to do
just some things a generally done in imperfect way, the great thing about
that it is extensible which allows to to fix some issues and use it very well.
BTW there are still things that even "broken" std::locale does well, for example
(at least under Linux) works quite fine.
> My library is a generic implementation of Unicode, while Boost.Locale is
> wrapper on top of ICU, IBM's Unicode library.
Yes and not, it is not wrapper of ICU, but ICU is central part, you can use many
providers even standard library and in many cases it works very well.
But ICU gives very good and high quality features that standard libraries
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk